Uppoffras rättsutvecklingen för effektivitet? En analys av skiljeförfarandens effekt på prejudikatbildningen

Sammanfattning: Natural and legal persons are in some form of relationship with each other based on different circumstances. When two parties disagree about an issue, they naturally want to resolve the situation in some way. For many, this solution lies with state courts where one party sues the other party at the district court as first instance. In some scenarios, the relationship is based on a contract that the parties entered into to achieve a purpose by fulfilling their respective obligations that the contract entails. Sometimes a problem arises due to these obligations and the parties want to solve it properly. In some circumstances, parties may obtain resolution through a third private actor instead of the state courts. As a common and very attractive solution, arbitration thus replaces the process in state courts and offers the parties the opportunity to get justice with the situation. This type of resolution methods means many advantages for the involved parties who get a final verdict in their conflict quite quickly compared to the process at the court. Arbitration also has certain aspects, two of which are the lack of appeal possibilities and the secrecy of the process. These can probably be advantages for the parties involved as their conflict gets resolved without delay and all circumstances relating to the conflict remains confidential. It can be stated that the process becomes efficient. On the other hand, these represent a hidden risk for legal development in society. Part of the legal development takes place through the Supreme Court's rulings, where the court interprets legal rules, applies them to new areas and creates guidances for unclear legal situations. These rulings become precedents and help society regarding how laws should be interpreted and applied. In order for this precedent setting to take place, a case needs to be initiated at the District Court and through appeal continue to the Court of Appeal and end up at the Supreme Court after appealing the Court of Appeal's ruling. As parties opt out of the court process and resolve their conflicts through arbitration, fewer cases end up in the Supreme Court. This naturally affects the Supreme Court's ability to create precedents, which in turn slows down legal development in society. The essay aims to explain this relationship and if the shrinking state of legal development is disregarded for the effectiveness that arbitration offers.