SALC 15 year anniversary
SALC has been an independent boutique law firm for 15 years now. Those 15 years have been a truly interesting and intriguing period of time. In turbulent times of rapid change and development we have seen an increased demand for mediation and settlement of disputes outside court and arbitration. We have also seen many of the large international brands expanding their markets to new territories. The legal tools have improved dramatically and we now have daily and cost-efficient access to important information in a way never experienced before. Digitalization has exploded and working remotely is the new black. The Corona-virus has forced us to perform online with new meeting tools. The spacious and very expensive city offices have been replaced with co-working units and home offices. In the last year and a half business travels have been down to almost zero. Small national law firms, such as SALC, are looking not only for loose international relationships, but to form strong virtual bonds with international law firms and thus improving our strength. Law is becoming increasingly more internationalized.
Our journey over 15 years has been together with our clients and colleagues we work with in other firms. We believe in long lasting relationships with our clients and partners. And we work hard for them. We believe in a strong client engagement and commitment. We believe in a high level of availability also on a partner level. We believe in knowing our clients business well. We believe in combining a business oriented view with our legal work.
We are deeply satisfied to see that many of our clients today were also our clients back in 2006. We have transformed from being “just” lawyers to becoming trusted business advisors working more closely with our major clients. We are much looking forward to the next 15 years to come, with new challenges, new interesting problems to solve and new inspiring meetings with people from every possible culture and corner of the world, always unified by the strong belief in the Rule of Law as the cornerstone of democracy.
Något om bestämmelserna om entledigande av skiljemän i skiljeförfaranden och handläggningsfrågor
Med nedanstående korta rader, önskar vi lämna några synpunkter från den praktiserande juristens vardag.
Att en skiljeman ska vara opartisk och oberoende är grundläggande för ett skiljeförfarande och regleras i 8 § lag (1999:116) om skiljeförfarande (”LSF”). Om en skiljeman inte uppfyller detta, utgör det klandergrund enligt 34 § 1 stycket 6 p LSF. Detta var även fallet enligt den tidigare lagen (1929:145) om skiljemän (”LSM”), låt vara att reglerna återfanns i andra paragrafer.
Artikeln finns att läsa i sin helhet här.
Författare: Dan Engström och Elin Nilsson
Good news for litigators from the Court of Justice of the European Union
Swedish courts have had problems in determining how to handle the copyright issue, when a copy-right protected work is submitted to the courts as evidence. The rightholder has in several cases claimed that it is a violation of his or her copy-right, when the counterparty has submitted the copyright protected work as evidence in a dispute. Is the court in these cases to be seen as “the public”, so that a “communication to the public” or a “distribution to the public” has been committed, i.e. a copyright infringement? Should a party in a dispute have to consider this before submitting evidence?
On 28 October 2020 in Case C-637/19 the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that a sub-mission to a court shall be deemed as sub-mitted “to a clearly defined and closed group of persons holding public service functions within a court, and not to an indeterminate number of potential reci-pients”. Accordingly, the court is not to be seen as “the public”. Consequently, a “communication to the public” or a ”distribution to the public” is not committed, when a copyright protected work has been submitted to the court as evidence in judicial proceedings. In other words, the submission to the court does not constitute a copyright infringement.
In its judgment, the Court of Justice of the Euro-pean Union states that the right to effective reme-dy “would be seriously compromised if a right-holder were able to oppose the disclosure of evi-dence to a court on the sole ground that that evi-dence contains subject matter protected by copy-right”.
We cannot agree more and we warmly welcome this judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union.