Andreas Johard
Andreas Johard is co-head of Hammarskiöld’s Dispute Resolution practice and specializes in international arbitration and litigation.
Andreas acts on a regular basis as counsel for Swedish and foreign clients in arbitrations under e.g. the SCC and the ICC rules, as well as in ad hoc proceedings. Andreas further acts as counsel before domestic courts, including the Supreme Court. Andreas’ dispute resolution experience encompasses, inter alia, post M&A, international investment law, complex disputes in the financial sector, construction and energy as well as oil and gas delivery.
Andreas has acted several times as counsel for States, inter alia the Kingdom of Spain, the Republic of Poland and the Republic of Kazakhstan in complex setting aside proceedings regarding investment arbitrations under the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). Andreas has further represented multinational companies in complex take-or-pay disputes concerning LNG. Andreas has also represented companies concerning the construction of several LNG plants in Sweden and abroad.
Andreas is recommended by Legal500 and named future leader in arbitration by Who’s Who Legal.
“Andreas Johard has a hands-on approach to dispute resolution. He is good at strategic thinking and always seems to be one step ahead of the opponent. Andreas is thorough in his work. Working and communicating with Andreas is easy. You can truly see that he is motivated by his work and enjoys it.” (Legal500 2022)
“Andreas Johard is a very practical lawyer with a good overall background.” (Legal500 2022)
Practice Area
Panel
- Contributing Author
Experience
- Vinge law firm (Brussels and Stockholm) (2007 - 2010)
- Chancellor of Justice of Sweden (2009 - 2009)
- Södertörn District Court (2009 - 2010)
- Cederquist law firm (2010 - 2013)
- MAQS law firm (2013 - 2018)
- Hannes Snellman (2018 - 2021)
- Hammarskiöld (2021 - Present)
Membership
- Swedish Bar Association
- International Bar Association
- Swedish Arbitration Association
Qualifications
- LLM in law
- Diploma from the SCC’s arbitrator programme
Education
- Stockholm University
- Ghent Universiteit (Belgium)
5 Contributions by Andreas Johard
PRACTICE NOTES
Arbitration and State Immunity in Sweden: Waiver, diplomatic versus state immunity, and enforcing awards against sovereign assets and sovereign wealth funds (Sedelmayer; Ascom)
This Practice Note explores how state immunity interacts with arbitration proceedings in Sweden. For an overall primer on state immunity and arbitration, see Practice Note: State immunity and arbitration—general considerations. In addition, for Practice Notes on state immunity across multiple jurisdictions worldwide (including England and Wales), see our ‘State immunity’ subtopic: State immunity and arbitration—overview.
Introduction—State immunity and international arbitration
As a general principle, Swedish courts honour state immunity for sovereign acts but not for commercial conduct. Consequently, agreeing an arbitration clause typically amounts to a waiver of immunity for arbitral and court proceedings connected to a contract. Challenges may nevertheless emerge at the enforcement stage of an arbitral award. The key issue is whether the property targeted by enforcement measures is substantially used for official functions. If so, that property is shielded. If not, state immunity cannot be relied upon, as outlined below. In this setting, it is essential to emphasise that arbitration functions independently of any court’s jurisdiction. Unlike courts, arbitral tribunals draw their authority solely from the parties’ agreement rather than any governmental mandate. Accordingly, immunity is observed for public acts yet denied for trading activity before Swedish courts, and a contractual arbitration clause generally signals an intentional waiver of immunity thereby...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
SCC Express: 21-day non-binding Neutral assessment under the SCC Rules for Express Dispute Assessment: procedure, costs, appointment, conduct and suitability
This Practice Note addresses the dispute resolution process commonly known as , which is governed by the SCC Rules for Express Dispute Assessment (the Rules).
What is ?
The Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC) Arbitration Institute introduced the SCC Rules for Express Dispute Assessment () in May 2021. Developed to give clients additional options for resolving disputes without turning to traditional procedures, following client and market research showing demand, the process is a new hybrid of arbitration and mediation. As with commercial arbitration and mediation, it is voluntary and confidential. Crucially, confidentiality applies by default and extends to any subsequent arbitration, litigation or other legal proceedings. In contrast to conventional arbitration, the conclusions are not legally binding or enforceable. It also departs from mediation because the usual outcome is an assessment of the merits of the dispute, rather than a mediator’s suggestion for an amicable settlement.
How does distinguish itself from other forms of dispute resolution?
Unlike traditional arbitration, its findings are not legally binding or enforceable.
The procedure is designed to conclude within a month...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Sweden: Challenging arbitral tribunal jurisdiction - kompetenz-kompetenz, separability, assertion doctrine, Court of Appeal review, awards v decisions, de novo review, time limits, and intra-EU investment arbitration developments
The Tribunal’s Power to Determine its Own Jurisdiction ( kompetenz-kompetenz )
This Practice Note examines issues of tribunal jurisdiction under Swedish law.
Section 2 of the Swedish Arbitration Act (SAA) states that:
Arbitrators are empowered to decide their own jurisdiction over the dispute.
If they conclude that they have jurisdiction, any party may appeal to the Court of Appeal within 30 days of receiving the decision.
The arbitral proceedings may continue while the court considers the appeal.
Sections 34 and 36 apply to any action challenging an arbitral award that includes a decision on jurisdiction.
In consequence, Swedish law endorses the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz (la compétance de la compétance), meaning arbitrators have authority to rule on their own competence. In doing so, they should also observe the separability doctrine, which the SAA has codified (see: No Jurisdiction below)...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Sweden: Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards—Exequatur, Refusal Grounds, Stays, Enforcement Measures, Invalidity/Set-Aside, and Intra-EU Investment Arbitration Developments
Swedish law differentiates between ‘Swedish arbitral awards’ and ‘foreign arbitral awards’.
Domestic awards are enforceable in the same manner as judgments of Swedish courts, and, notably, they proceed without any exequatur requirement.
In contrast, to execute a foreign arbitral award in Sweden, one must first secure exequatur from the Court of Appeal and then apply to the Swedish Enforcement Authority for execution of the award. In practice, the procedure is straightforward and will usually take a few weeks, unless the counterparty raises objections, in which event the process may become considerably lengthier.
This practice note deals solely with the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards and does not consider domestic awards within this context and scope. Before examining the rules governing enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Sweden, a brief outline concerning invalidity and the setting aside of an arbitral award will be provided for clarity. The Swedish Arbitration Act (the SAA) sets out provisions on invalidity of awards and on setting aside awards. Section 33 of the SAA identifies the grounds on which an award is invalid, namely:
the award determines a matter which, under Swedish law, is not arbitrable,
if the award, or the manner in which the award...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Sweden-seated Arbitration: Interim Measures—Tribunal and Court Powers, Criteria, Emergency Arbitrators and Enforceability (SAA, SCC Rules, Code of Judicial Procedure)
Interim remedies from the tribunal
The Swedish Arbitration Act (SAA) applies to all arbitrations seated in Sweden, irrespective of any international nexus (Section 46 SAA). An official translation into English is available through the SCC Arbitration Institute. Under Section 25, paragraph 4 of the SAA, interim relief—described as “provisional and conservatory measures”—can be granted in international arbitration proceedings in Sweden. That provision states that, unless the parties have agreed otherwise, an arbitral tribunal may, at the request of one party, order provisional or conservatory measures. The tribunal may additionally require the requesting party to provide reasonable security for the damages that the opposing party may incur as a result of such an interim measure. These measures are expressly available in international arbitrations seated in Sweden. A comparable rule empowering tribunals to order interim measures is contained in the 2023 arbitration rules of the SCC Arbitration Institute (the SCC Rules), Section 37. It is essential to note that decisions rendered by a tribunal under Section 25, paragraph 4 of the SAA are not enforceable, and no Swedish court can make them enforceable. However,...
Arbitration
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
