Supreme Court
P.O. Box 2066, SE-103 12 Stockholm, Sweden.
hogsta.domstolen@dom.se

SUPREME COURT
SVEA COURT OF APPEAL
Department 02 Rotel 020114

Applicant Villa Europa Sp. z o. o., 016408763
ul. Sienna 64
00-820 Warsaw
Poland, EU
webinar@covid-19-response-webinar.org 

Counterpart
Axel Brandenburg, 19590407-8317
Brevduvegatan 4 Lgh 1103 169 72 Solna

Agents: Attorneys Thomas Ekenberg and Michael Erici Ekenberg & Andersson
Advokatbyrå Stockholm AB Box 7500 103 92 Stockholm

24-03-2023

1. Summons application
I am fully appealing SVEA's judgment of 20 December 2023, delivered on
11 January 2024 in Stockholm in case 0 12191-22.

2. I appeal against the appealed judgment:

1. Violation of the provisions of the applicable substantive law,
i.e. sections 48, 52 and 54 of the Swedish Arbitration Act in
conjunction with Article 1154 of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure
(KPC) in conjunction with Article 1155 §2 in conjunction with Article
1156 through incorrect application of Polish substantive law (applicable
substantive law) to the actual situation in this case.

2. Violation of procedural provisions that have a significant impact
on the outcome of the case, i.e. article 1205 §1 1 CPC in connection
with article 1208 61 CPC in connection with section 34 of the Swedish
Arbitration Act by not taking these provisions into account, thereby
arbitrarily assuming that the arbitration award is not final, binding
and legally enforceable, which resulted in the claimant's application
being rejected without basis.

3. According to Article 233 §1 of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure
(KPC), according to Article 308 KPC In accordance with Article 13
§2 KPC and according to the Swedish Code of Procedure: Chapter 38,
EVIDENCE FROM DOCUMENTS, Sections 1 and 2, errors in factual findings,
which consists in SVEA assuming that an unspecified copy (without showing
the original or its notarized copy) can constitute evidence of what is
written in the original.

4. Failure to conduct evidentiary proceedings regarding the factual
allegations against which the defendant defended himself in the case
before the SVEA, which constitutes a violation of Art. 1191 in RB.

5. Violation of the provisions of the NY Convention 1958, the Swedish Law
on Arbitration Procedures (SAA), Polish Substantive Law on Arbitration
Procedures by reviewing the subject matter of the dispute in the
application for recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award,

6. Violation of the principle of the right to a court under Article
45 paragraph 1 of the Polish Constitution by not applying the legal
provisions relevant to the legal relationship that unites the parties,

7. Violation of the principle of legality expressed in Article 7 of the
Polish Constitution by not applying the legal provisions relevant to the
legal relationship between the parties, despite the fact that the SVEA
court had the obligation to act according to and within the limits of
the law.

3. In view of the above, I request:

3.1. Annulment of the appealed judgment from SVEA in its entirety,

3.2. Recognition of the Arbitral Tribunal's judgment in the Kingdom
     of Sweden,

3.3. Notify declaration of enforceability for the Arbitration Court's
     judgment within the Kingdom of Sweden.

4. The basis of the appeal

5. Non-application of relevant substantive law in the proceedings.

Taking into account the content of the Swedish Arbitration Act (Section
48 - If an arbitration agreement has an international connection, the law
agreed upon by the parties shall apply to the agreement.), it was clear
from the beginning in this case (taking into account the content of the
summons, the arbitration clause and the process annexes) that the case
was about the recognition of a foreign arbitration award in Sweden. The
place of the proceedings and issuance of the arbitral award was Warsaw,
Poland, EU. It is also worth underlining that the Arbitration Clause
(AktBil 60) in the parties' agreement clearly states that the language
of the arbitration shall be Polish and that the law to be applied to
the agreement shall be Polish substantive law together with the 1958
New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law.

Therefore, it is clear (see also section 49 of the Swedish Arbitration
Act (SAA)) that the law applicable to the parties' agreement is Polish
substantive law together with the NY 1958 Convention and the UNCITRAL
Model Law. It should be noted that Poland and Sweden have fully adopted
the provisions of the NY 1958 Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law into
their legal systems.

For the above reasons, the aforementioned part of the Arbitration
Doctrine refers to the agreement (contract) as a whole and the principle
of separability is not applicable in this case.

Despite this, SVEA presents in the preamble of the judgment a difficult
to understand, complicated and incorrect analysis of the legal situation
in the case that has been submitted to SVEA.

On the one hand, SVEA confirms and accepts that the applicable law
is Polish substantive law "Therefore, the question of whether this is
an arbitral award in this case must be determined in the first place
according to Polish law", then without examining the factual basis
for assuming (presuming) (sic), that "The Court of Appeal therefore
assumes that the internationally accepted principles of application of
the Convention are part of Polish law."

There is no reason for SVEA to make assumptions. Poland and Sweden have
ratified the NY 1958 Convention in its entirety, and the text of the
Convention (Article V) has been added verbatim (with linguistic nuances)
to the Polish Arbitration Act and the Swedish Arbitration Act. However,
the remaining scope of the Polish legal system is fundamentally different
compared to the Swedish legal system.

The Swedish legal system is generally referred to as Scandinavian Law
civil law with German influences, while the Polish legal system is
considered Napoleonic law and is a derivative of European "continental"
law. The Swedish legal system, although traditionally considered a
civil law system, does not fit very well into either the civil law or
customary law category. It is not entirely civil law because it lacks
a consistent codification. such as the German Burgerliches Gesetzbuch
(BGB) or the Polish Kodeks Cywilny and Kodeks Postępowania Cywilnego.

Let us once again repeat SVEA's statement that "The Court of Appeal thus
assumes that internationally accepted principles of the application of
conventions form part of Polish law in order to underline that Polish law,
as the law of a member state of the European Union, accepts international
law as well as Polish law expressed in international agreements including
EU agreements as well as in its own (Polish) civil and civil procedural
law.

However, Polish law, as SVEA falsely and unjustifiably claims, does not
accept the so-called "internationally accepted principles (opinion)". The
only way to accept international law (with the exception of laws adopted
by the EU) is, both in Sweden and and Poland, their ratification by a
constitutional body of the state.

The Polish parliament has never ratified a law entitled "internationally
repugnant opinion. According to worthy legal questionnaires to a Swedish
lawyer, it also appears that such a law has not been ratified in Sweden.

For this reason, it is incorrect and inappropriate to refer to and
accept, in a preamble to the I judgment, the SVEA as the basis of the
procedure and the delivery of a judgment by simply adopting unclear
legal principles.

The parties to arbitration proceedings based in Poland and Sweden can
freely agree on the applicable law regardless of conflict of law rules.
In the absence of such an agreement, the arbitral tribunal decides on
the applicable substantive law. This is purely a firmly established
principle of arbitration within international law.

This has also been formally taken into account in the Polish Arbitration
Act through amendments in 2008 as well as in the amendments introduced
in 2019 in the Swedish Arbitration Act, which give the arbitration board
great freedom to decide on the applicable law (regardless of conflict
of law norms).

The 2023 SCC Rules also contain a very similar provision in Article 28
(Governing Law).

Applicable law for this procedure is Polish substantive law as originally
was determined by SVEA with the support of the Swedish Arbitration Act
(Sections 48 and 52) and the aforementioned reference to Polish law as
the applicable law is clearly stated in the parties' arbitration clause
(AktBil 60).

The following provisions on applicable law, i.e. the Polish Code of
Civil Procedure, are clear on this matter. Let's take some of them.

Part five - jurisdiction and general provisions of the arbitral tribunal
$1154. The provisions of this part apply if the place of the proceedings
before the arbitral tribunal is located on the territory of the Republic
of Poland.

§1155 paragraph 2. If the place of the proceedings before the arbitral
tribunal has not been determined by the parties or by the arbitral
tribunal, the place of these proceedings is considered to be in the
territory of the Republic of Poland if a decision terminating the
proceedings in the case has been issued in this territory.

§1156. The Polish courts have national jurisdiction in matters governed
by the provisions of this part, if the place of the proceedings before the
arbitral tribunal is located on the territory of the Republic of Poland.

The procedural freedom to choose the applicable substantive law is
strongly anchored in both Swedish (Section 27a) and Polish (Part Five
of the Civil Procedure Code) law.

For the above reasons, the applicable law to determine any factors (facts)
in the arbitration or arbitration proceedings is Polish substantive law.

The applicable law for the legal relationship between the parties in
this proceeding is also Polish substantive law as described in the Polish
Civil Code and the Polish Civil Procedure Code.

Note here that the Swedish Code of Procedure: Evidence Chapter 35
General rules of evidence Paragraph 2 says: "Evidence of a circumstance
that is generally known is not required.  Evidence of a rule of law is
not required either. However, if foreign law is to be applied and its
content is unfamiliar to the court, the court may require the party to
present evidence concerning this."

Swedish authorities can turn to the central authority (Central Authority
Ministry of Justice, 103 33 Stockholm) to get information about the
legislation in other countries (according to the European Convention on
Information on Foreign Law (1968)). According to the same convention,
Swedish authorities can also turn to the Polish Ministry of Justice with
such a request (Aleje Ujazdowskie 11, 00-950 Warsaw, Poland, EU).

It is clear from the above that SVEA did not apply substantive law
according to the parties' agreed arbitration clause, nor according
to what follows directly from the Swedish Arbitration Act and Polish
arbitration legislation.

The Polish Judicial Code: Article Sta. (Determining and applying
the applicable foreign law § 1 The court automatically determines
and applies the applicable foreign law.  The court kasi turn to the
Minister of Justice to obtain the text of this law and explanation ov
foreign court grass According to the Polish law of February 4, 2011
"Private International Law, Chapter B, Arbitration Article 39.1 The
arbitration clause is governed by the law chosen by the parties 2.
If there is no choice of law, the arbitration clause is governed by the
law of the country where the agreed place of arbitration is located.

6. Complaint against arbitration award. Confirmation of the applicable
law for the legal relationship of the parties, such as Polish raaterial
law. enables the parties to decide whether and in what way they can
legally annul an arbitral award by the arbitral tribunal. One of the basic
principles of arbitration, deeply rooted in both Poland (see below) and
Sweden (SAA section 34), is that arbitral awards cannot be appealed as to
their substance. An arbitral award can be annulled by a general (state)
court only after it has been challenged on formal or procedural grounds.

The Polish Code of Civil Procedure is very clear in this regard. TITLE
VII Appeal from arbitral award (Polish Code of Civil Procedure) clearly
defines that:

Article 1205. § 1. An arbitral award issued in the Republic of Poland can
be annulled by the court only in a procedure initiated by the submission
of an application for its annulment (worth underlining), according to
the provisions below. Submitting an application is time-limited (similar
to the Swedish Arbitration Ordinance in section 34):

Article 1208. § 1. The application for annulment of the arbitration
award is submitted to the appellate court in the area where the court that
would be competent to hear the case is located... within two months from
the date of service of the dorm or if a party has requested completion,
correction or interpretation of the judgment - within two months from
the date of service of the arbitral tribunal's decision on this request.

The arbitral tribunal informed the parties in written justifications of
the possibility of appealing an arbitral award (see AktBil 60-lower part
of the last page) no later than two months after the arbitral tribunal's
decision was served (Article 1208. § 11 Civil Procedure Act). Content
of the information:

Inform the parties: The Court informs the parties that, according to the
Court's rules, the decision in this case is final. However, the parties
may submit an application for annulment of the decision (judgment)
under the Polish Code of Civil Procedure, Article 1208. $1. Due to the
Arbitration Clause entered into between the parties. Procedures and in
this regard, that "... the applicable law of the Agreement is Polish
substantive law..."  the court informs the Parties that the application
for annulment of the arbitration award must be submitted within two months
from the date on which the Party received (postman) the decision (judgment
) in its final form. Submitting an application for appeal takes place
according to the procedure described in the Polish Code of Civil Procedure
and Art. 6.2.3.9 of the court's regulations, respectively. To implement
this right and inform the party, one can/must use professional help from
a lawyer and/or lawyer. Neither party, despite written information from
the court, filed an application to set aside the arbitral award from
the arbitral tribunal to the Court of Appeal in Warsaw.

Therefore, in September 2022, the arbitral award was given the status
of final judgment. Also with respect to the SAA, one should note the
provision in section 34 last paragraph "After the expiry of the period
[two months) the party cannot raise new objections to support for his
claim. The essence of the application for annulment of arbitration
is to create a control mechanism that respects, on the one hand, the
independence and autonomy of the arbitral tribunal and, on the other hand,
prevents non-state courts' decisions that violate the rule of law from
operating in the legal trade. Since the parties have not presented any
new objections (not submitted an application), according to the applicable
law and Art. 1205. § 1 (above) of the Civil Procedure Act consider that
the arbitration award is final, unchangeable and legally binding. The
above comments concern the possibility of annulling decisions of an
arbitral tribunal issued under Polish law. In research and jurisprudence
based on the said provision. there is a view according to which filing
a plain application for the annulment of an arbitral award is the only
legal action that can lead to the annulment of the award. In addition,
an application for annulment of the judgment can only refer to such
judgments where the arbitral tribunal has decided the claims of the
parties, i.e. has decided the case on the merits.

In order to challenge an arbitral award, the parties may also seek to
invalidate the very agreement that formed the basis of the arbitration. As
a general rule, the parties may seek the annulment of any contract
through civil and/or criminal proceedings.  Annulment of the agreement
can take place both in Poland and in Sweden through civil proceedings
that end with a legally binding judgment from a general court. The
parties to this proceeding have not obtained such a judgment, and have
not even sought to obtain one. The parties may also seek to challenge
the agreement through criminal proceedings.

This was also done by Mr. Brandenburg, who on April 9, 2023 submitted a
report to the Swedish legal authorities about a suspected crime regarding
forgery and/or modification of the agreement by the parties. the species.
An appropriate procedure was carried out and on December 19, 2023,
the case was dropped completely (AktBil 104).

A similar report was made by the defendant to the Polish Prosecutor's
Office. After the completion of the procedure, neither the Polish
prosecutor's office nor the Swedish police found grounds to bring
charges. The public prosecutor's office concluded and closed the case
(case no. 4308-5 Ds.1115.2023).

This makes it unequivocally clear that the agreement entered into by the
parties in this process in the form of an apostille [AktBil 89 and AktBil
60] or a notarial act (Section 56, SAA and at the written request of
SVEA) is binding and fully in accordance with the law both in Poland and
Sweden. Pursuant to Article 2 § 2 of the Act of 14 February 1991 - the
Polish Notary Act, notarial actions performed by a notary in accordance
with the Act have an official character. Notarial acts and other notarial
documents constitute official documents as defined in Article 244;
Evidence from official documents under the Polish Code of Civil Procedure.

Therefore, according to the Polish Code of Civil Procedure (Art. 244. § 1
(Official documents)) all notarial extracts, including the Agreement of
the Parties and decisions of the Arbitration Court, are deemed to be true.

In Polish and Swedish private law, the principle applies that the burden
of proof for a certain fact is on the party who invokes it (to derive
beneficial legal consequences from it). In this case, the burden of proof
is on the defendant, who claims that he has suffered injury. Because the
defendant has not rescinded the Parties' Agreement through civil and/
or criminal action, we must assume that the Parties' Agreement presented
in the case is valid and binding on the parties.

7. Inaccuracies in factual determinations, which means that SVEA (Svea
Court of Appeal) assumed that an undescribed copy (without showing the
original or its notarized extract) can constitute evidence of what is
stated in the original.

1. With reference to Article 233 § 1 of the Polish Code of Civil
Procedure, in conjunction with Article 308 of the Deň Polish Code of
Civil Procedure and Article 13 § 2 of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure.

2. And also with reference to the Swedish Code of Procedure: Chapter 38,
EVIDENCE FROM DOCUMENTS, Section 1, "Written documents that are relied
on as evidence must be presented in original." Section 2: "Anyone in
possession of a written document which may be considered important as
evidence is obliged to produce it...".

3. We point to a fundamental and obvious violation of the above procedural
rules. The offense consisted in giving probative value to a copy of a
document, a copy of part of a document. The defendant has not produced
the original documents because he does not have them, and copies are
just clumsy manipulation by the defendant.

4. All "documents" tendered in evidence by the defendant are not documents
under Polish or Swedish law and cannot form a basis for proof.

5. The Claimant has systematically and consistently questioned the
authenticity of the "documents" submitted by the Defendant.

6. We point to a fundamental violation of the arbitration clause
between the parties [AkiBil 89 and 601, where the parties agreed that
"... the parties decide to conduct the arbitration solely based on
documents.... The violation consisted in SVEA assigning copies of
documents or copy of document fragment probative value. (The parties
agree to conduct arbitration proceedings solely based on documents.)

According to established jurisprudence in Poland and Sweden, it is clear
that a copy of a private document without showing the original document
(submitted as evidence in the case) does not constitute evidence, as it
does not meet the requirements prescribed by law for document. Section
38 of the Swedish Procedure Act is clear "Written documents that are
relied on as evidence must be presented in original".

Plaintiff consistently disputed the probative value of any specified
copy of the "document" or fragment of the "document", meaning that a
copy of the document or its parts could not form the basis of factual
findings in this case made by SVEA.

Despite this apparent evidence in the civil case (evidence from original
documents), the SVEA made factual findings in the case based on false
"documents" submitted by the defendant, leading to an incorrect
decision. At the same time, SVEA, without any justification, did not
give any probative value to the plaintiff's document that met all the
attributes of a document.

In view of the cited doctrinal position and the provisions of Polish and
Swedish legislation, during the process before SVEA, the defendant did not
submit any evidence from a document that would indicate that the parties
had not entered into the agreement submitted as evidence in the case.

Consequently, it cannot be accepted that the defendant proves his claim
in accordance with Art. 6 of the Polish Civil Code. The burden of proof
is on the party who claims that a certain legal result is derived from
a fact. This provision concerns the substantive legal aspect of the
burden of proof, i.e. the weight of the evidence. The institution of
burden of proof in this material sense is used to qualify the legal
consequence of a negative result in the evidence. The party who claims
that certain rights or obligations derive from certain facts has the
obligation to prove these legal facts. Since the responding party has
not presented the main evidence in the form of the original agreement
between the parties according to the procedural stand, it has not met
the requirements under Art. 6 of the Polish Civil Code.

It is importat to emphasize that SVEA has violated basic rules of the
civil procedure relating to the evidentiary procedure according to the
Civil Procedure Act:

Chapter 2 Evidence Procedure, Division 1, General Provisions.

Article 235'. In an application for taking evidence, the party is
obliged to state the evidence in a way that enables its execution and
specify the facts to be proved with this evidence.

Article 236. § 1. In the decision on the admissibility of evidence,
the court will indicate the means of evidence and the facts to be proven
with it,

$2. If a party has applied for a decision regarding the admissibility of
evidence, it is sufficient in the decision to refer to the content of
her/his application. SVEA has violated the above rules on evidentiary
procedure, in particular Article 236 §1 (above), resulting in the
claimant being misled regarding evidence and its purpose in the
proceedings before SVEA

8. The question of the credibility of the arbitral tribunal. The concept
of arbitral tribunal and/or the concept of arbitration is defined in the
NY 1958 Convention by the procedures of the arbitration. Arbitration
involves such a method (procedure) for deciding civil cases where the
decision-making body is not a state court and its jurisdiction, which
excludes the rulings of state courts, is derived from the agreement
of the parties. If the will of the parties submits the dispute to the
jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal, the court is competent to make a
decision in the form of a judgment which, under certain conditions, has
the same legal effect as a judgment from a state court. In addition to
the will of the parties, an indispensable legal basis for the operation
of the arbitral tribunal is that the law allows a case to be referred
to it for decision and that it establishes the conditions that must be
met for an arbitral award to have the procedural effect of a judgment
from a state court. Therefore, it is argued in the literature that there
are two factors that constitute the legal basis for the operation of the
arbitral tribunal: the will of the parties and the provisions of the law.

Thus, the main (fundamental) characteristics of the arbitral tribunal
include: (1) its non-governmental (private) character, (2) the will of
the parties as a source of authority to decide the case, and (3) the
recognition of this authority by law with the effect that the arbitral
tribunal's judgments are equated with judgments from state courts.

The source system for the right to arbitration consists of international
agreements and national legislation, including a range of codified
provisions. In the literature, one can also find statements consistent
with this catalog also including rules for arbitral tribunals and the
parties' agreements on procedure.

The provisions in question have been reformed by the provisions of the
New York Convention of 10 June 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of
Foreign Arbitral Awards, which were later supplemented by the European
Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of 21 April 1961. As
a result of the efforts to harmonize national arbitration legislation
through the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law
(UNCITRAL), the UNCITRAL Model Law has been adopted. The law in question
does not have a normative character and is not a binding legal act for
individual countries. It was drafted not as an international agreement but
as a model regulation of substantive issues of international commercial
arbitration.

The Polish and Swedish legislatures have also taken advantage of
the possibility of a comprehensive amendment to the provisions on
arbitration. According to the Polish Law of July 28, 2005, which
entered into force on January 1, 2006, the former Third Book of the
First Part entitled "Arbitration Court" (Articles 695-715) was replaced
by the Fifth Part of the Civil Procedure Code, which was entitled
"Arbitration Court". (Articles 1154-1217). Accordingly, the current
arbitration provisions are based on the UNCITRAL Model Law. It should be
emphasized that both the Polish and Swedish rules apply to both national
and international arbitration.

Against this background, an arbitration should be considered a procedure
where the dispute is submitted to one or more arbitrators with the consent
of the parties, who make a binding decision in the dispute. By choosing
arbitration, the parties choose a private dispute resolution procedure
instead of court proceedings.

The Pan-European Court of Arbitration commenced its operations on January
2, 2020. The Court's operations were based on an arbitral tribunal rule
derived from the NY 1958 Convention, the UNCITRAL Model Law and the Polish
Arbitration Act. The content of the rule was available to all interested
parties in printed form (in Polish and English), including the parties
to this proceeding. The defendant and the plaintiff are fluent in spoken
and written English. (A draft translation into the Swedish language,
carried out for the needs of this appeal, can be found in Appendix 1).

1. The arbitration in this matter was conducted in accordance with the
Arbitration Rules:

1.1. The arbitral tribunal established its competence (jurisdiction)
after receiving the summons.

1.2. The arbitral tribunal selected an arbitrator and obtained from the
arbitrator a statement of impartiality and independence.

1.3 The arbitral award notified the defendant (11-05-2022) by registered
letter of the initiation of arbitration (to the address specified by
the defendant in the Arbitration Clause). The same letter included
the complaint and informed the defendant of his rights, including the
selection of the arbitrator and the parties' option (under court rules)
to appoint another arbitrator.

1.4. Properly notified, the defendant did not pick up the court's letter.

1.5. The arbitral tribunal acted extraordinarily by summoning the
defendant again (26-06-2022) by registered letter about the ongoing
arbitration (to the address specified by the defendant in the Arbitration
Clause).

1.6. Properly notified, the defendant did not pick up the court's letter.

1.7. Taking into account the above and the rules of the court, the
Arbitral Tribunal carried out the arbitration procedure.

1.8. After the completion of the proceedings and after the issuance
of the arbitral award, the Arbitral Tribunal sent by registered letter
(09-07-2022) the award to the respondent (at the address indicated by
the respondent in the Arbitration Clause), together with information
about the possibility of an appeal, to the Court of Appeal in Warsaw
against the arbitral tribunal's decision no later than two months from
the receipt of the court decision.

1.9. Content of the information (AktBil 89 and 60 last page):
"Information to the Parties in the Proceedings: The Court informs the
Parties that, according to the Court's rules, the decision in this case
is final. However, the Parties in the proceedings can appeal the decision
(sentence) according to the procedure described in the Polish Code of
Civil Procedure, Article 1208 § 1. With bearing in mind the Arbitration
Clause entered into between the Parties in the proceedings, and this
clause, that'... the applicable law of the Agreement is Polish substantive
law...' the court informs the Parties that an appeal against the decision
of the arbitral tribunal must be filed within two months from the date
when the party received (was served) the decision (verdict) in its final
form. The appeal takes place according to the procedure described in the
Polish Code of Civil Procedure and Article 6.2.3.9 of the Rules of Court,
respectively. To exercise this right and to be informed, the Parties
may use the professional assistance of a lawyer and/or legal advisor."

1.10. The parties did not file an appeal (only an appeal) of the
decision of the arbitral tribunal under the Code of Civil Procedure
Article 1205. Appeal of the decision of the arbitral tribunal. § 1. An
arbitral tribunal decision issued in the Republic of Poland can only be
annulled by the court through a procedure initiated after an appeal for
its annulment has been filed.

2.1 the proceedings before the SVEA, the Respondent did not demonstrate
any crime or violation of any clause of the Rules of the Arbitral Tribunal
and/or Polish law applicable to the arbitration.

3. The arbitration proceedings were not contested by the parties to
the proceedings.

4. The parties did not file any appeal of the arbitration and/or
arbitral tribunal to the Court of Appeal in Warsaw in accordance with the
applicable Polish substantive law. Since the Polish Court of Appeal is
the only authority that could have changed the decision of the arbitral
tribunal, the arbitral award issued in this case remains final.

5. Let us emphasize again: During the arbitration proceedings and after
its conclusion (appeal of the arbitration award), the parties did not
challenge the proceedings and the decision of the arbitral tribunal.

We again emphasize the importance of procedure as a fundamental feature
of an arbitral tribunal. As long as the agreed entity "arbitration
court applies the above-mentioned arbitration procedures, it remains
an arbitration court. This understanding of the above-mentioned
laws/procedures has led to a flourishing of arbitration procedures in
Poland and Sweden through the establishment of (i) permanent arbitration
courts, (ii) institutional ( specialized especially in Poland) arbitral
tribunals, (iii) ad hoc arbitral tribunals and recently (iv) online
arbitration courts.

There is no doubt that the Polish legislation on arbitration (the law
applicable to the agreement of the parties in this proceeding) is based
on the so-called the territorial theory of arbitration. The Polish Code
of Civil Procedure expresses this by referring to the provisions on the
application for annulment of a judgment (Article 1205 § 11 the Code of
Civil Procedure), as well as in the provisions on the recognition and
enforcement of arbitration awards (Article 1212 § 2, Article 1215 §
1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure) to the criterion of the court's
place for issuing the award.  Also article 1154 and article 1155 point
unequivocally that the place of the proceedings before the arbitral
tribunal is the territory of Poland, if a final judgment has been issued
on this territory (Article 1155 § 2).

Therefore, any arbitral tribunal operating in Poland (or Sweden) conducts
territorial activity, not local, by applying procedures prescribed in
Polish (or Swedish) arbitration law together with individual rules
for arbitral tribunals. A list of selected arbitral tribunals (+35)
in Poland can be found in Appendix 2.

9. Alleged "proof" that the arbitral tribunal does not exist. The Svea
court, without applying the correct competent legislation (see the box in
paragraph 7 above), accepted three objections from the defendant which
allegedly prove that the arbitral tribunal does not exist. By the very
fact that competent legislation has not been applied, the "proof" that the
arbitral tribunal does not exist is not valid. Svea court did not make a
decision to allow this evidence, but also did not specify the purpose of
this evidence (see point 7 box above Art. 236. § 1. Civil Procedure Act).

Despite this, the claimant will briefly comment on the alleged "evidence".

1.1. Absence of an informative sign on the facade of the building where
the arbitration court was located.

1.2. In Poland, there is no statutory obligation to place informative
signs on building facades except for the building's serial number.

1.3. Permission for external signs depends on the decision (usually
negative due to "visual pollution") from the building administrator.

1.4. For that reason, the evidence of the lack of a sign is without
any legal basis.

1.5. Furthermore, the defendant did not state who or when the photograph
of the face of the building was taken. The proof from the picture is
not signed.

1.6. The above views were clearly expressed by the plaintiff in the
procedural documents.

1.7. The Claimant attaches recently obtained historical images from the
Arbitral Tribunal's information boards located in the lobby and directly
at the entrance to the Tribunal's office., [Attachment 3]

2. Domain name registration date for the arbitral tribunal. Both the
defendant and SVEA claim that since the domain name for the court was
registered on 2021-09-28, then the arbitral tribunal did not exist at
the earlier date, at the time of the signing of the Agreement between
the parties on 2020-09-30.

2.1. The Defendant and SVEA commit a simple logical fallacy by claiming
that there is a causal relationship between two events (cause and effect),
where the effect is a direct consequence of the cause.

2.2. Establishing causation (or its absence) can be achieved by applying
the sine qua non test. Since there is no requirement in Poland and Sweden
to register Internet domains for individuals, companies or organizations,
the registration of the domain name could have taken place at any
time. Therefore there is none causal relationship between the date of
establishment of the arbitral tribunal (January 2 2020-see Title page of
the Rules of Court [Appendix 1]) and the date of registration of domain
pages for information about the arbitral tribunal.

2.3. Please also note that the authenticity and seriousness of the
Agreement between the parties has not been effectively challenged.

2.4. SVEA's above error of reasoning contravenes basic principles of
administration of justice, namely the principles of logical reasoning.

3. The fact that an internet domain has been registered. The plaintiff
emphasizes similar to above in point 2, that there is no relationship
other than (assignment to perform the service performance of the service)
between the company that registers the internet domain in question and
the company that orders the registration.

3.1. The plaintiff admits that he performed the service on behalf of
the court and registered the domain for the arbitral tribunal,

3.2. The claimant admits that he created (on behalf of the court) the
website for the arbitral tribunal,

3.3. The plaintiff also admits that he maintained the functionality of
the arbitral tribunal's website on behalf of the court,

3.4. However, the plaintiff categorically denies that there was any other
formal or informal relationship in the form of a conflict of interest
between the plaintiff and the arbitral tribunal.

3.5. It should also be added and emphasized that the arbitral tribunal
only administers. the arbitration procedure. The award of the arbitral
tribunal is issued by an arbitrator, who has been appointed in accordance
with the Rules of the Arbitral Tribunal (paragraphs 3.1 to 3.7 of the
Rules), in accordance with the Polish Arbitration Act (Articles 1169
to 1179 [Composition of the Arbitral Tribunal]) and in accordance with
Chapter III.  Composition of Schiedsgerichts: UNCITRAL Model Law. Let
us emphasize that the arbitrator in this case has provided a written
declaration of independence and impartiality (AktBil 51).

4. Addressing of correspondence from the arbitral tribunal from the
place of residence of the chairman of the claimant.

4.1. According to the rules of the arbitration court, point 4.4. Document
distribution, the court is required to send correspondence in a manner
that "enables proof of delivery" (clause 4.4.1.1.2 of the Rules of Court),

4.2. Traditionally and by law, the national postal operator (Poczta
Polska) is used to send correspondence from public (state) courts and
arbitral tribunals. The parties have agreed in the arbitration clause
that Poczta Polska and PostNord shall be the supplier of registered
mail service.

4.3. The Postal Act on the National Operator does not specify an
individual or fixed post office for sending registered items. Each of
the 8354 [sic] postal locations of Poczta Polska provides the service
of sending registered letters,

4.4. The defendant's and SVEA's claim that the fact that three letters
were sent from the post office in the city where the plaintiff's chairman
allegedly lives may indicate an undetermined (suspected) connection
between the chairman and the arbitral tribunal,

4.5. However, it is not true that the chairman lives in the indicated
town, Podkowa Leśna.  As evidence, I attach an official document
confirming this simple fact [Attachment 4],

4.6. The above illustrates a violation of the principle of equality of
arms and the principle of procedural contradiction. This fundamental
principle was violated by the fact that SVEA did not (according to
Article 236 of the Code of Civil Procedure) specify evidence and what
purposes that evidence would serve.

4.7. In other words, the court was obliged (which it did not do) under
Article 236 to give a "statement of evidence" - evidence from documents
on which the court intended to base its decision, and state (show) the
facts to be proved by means of that evidence. This principle has its
roots in the practice applied in Polish (and according to the applicable
law Article 235 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the form of so-called
"Redfern Schedules".

10. SVEA presents in the last part of the justifications for the judgment
SVEA's conclusions and decisions on the subject of the dispute in the
arbitration.

We should emphasize here that review of the subject matter of an
application for recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award is not
permitted under both the Polish and Swedish legal systems.

The principle of interrogatories (dispute) is a guideline according to
which "a directly affected party in a procedural struggle with the other
party for the favorable outcome for himself. Article 2361 par procedure
has the right el 2361 KPC, Decision on the acceptance of evidence: §
1. In the decision on the acceptance of evidence, the court shall indicate
the means of evidence and the facts to be proved with it, and if necessary
and possible also the time and place for the execution of the proof.

The application for recognition and enforcement of an arbitration award
submitted to SVEA has a cassatory nature, which means that the examination
of the application can lead either to the suspension of all or parts of
the arbitration award or to the rejection of the application, and never to
a decision on the subject matter and substance of the dispute which the
arbitral tribunal decided (Supreme Court Judgment of 13 December 1967,
I CR 445/67, OSNC 1968, No. 8-9, pos. 149, LEX No. 712; Supreme Court
Judgment of 6 January 1961, 2 CR 532/59, PIP 1962, pp. 346 ff.). The
examination of the application for recognition and enforcement aims to
determine whether, under the Polish Arbitration Act (applicable law in
the proceedings), there are grounds for setting aside this award.

As a general rule, there is no examination by the SVEA of the conformity
of an arbitral award with substantive law or examination of whether it
is based on the facts stated in its justification and whether these
facts have been correctly established (Supreme Court Judgment of 13
December 1967, I CR 445 /67, OSNC 1968, No. 8-9, item 149, LEX No. 712;
Supreme Court Judgment of 11 April 2002, III CKN 492/01, LEX No. 407129;
Supreme Court Judgment of 21 December 2004, I CK 405 /04, LEX No. 500191;
Supreme Court Judgment of December 8, 2006, V CSK 321/06, LEX No. 322023;
Supreme Court Judgment of May 11, 2007, I CSK 82/07, OSNC 2008, No. 6,
Pos. 64 , LEX No. 320021; Supreme Court Judgment of January 7, 2009,
II CSK 397/08, LEX No. 523608; Supreme Court Judgment of September 3,
2009, I CSK 53/09, LEX no. 527154).

11. Summary In light of the above, I request that the appeal be
approved in its entirety and that judgment be announced as stated
in the introduction (add petitum).  It should be emphasized that the
defendant in the process at SVEA, despite the clear obligation under
Polish and Swedish civil procedure law, has not submitted a single
original or authorized copy of any private document. For that reason,
all allegations made by the defendant are without probative value.

Court SVEA referred to the New York Convention but did not apply Polish
legal provisions that specify in detail the procedure for setting aside
an arbitral award. Therefore, SVEA could not reject the request because
the competent authority to set aside an arbitral award is the Polish Court
of Appeal, while the opposing party had the right to file an appropriate
request to set aside the arbitral award before the Polish Court of Appeal,
which the respondent did not do. In this situation, the arbitral award
remains fully binding from a legal perspective, and the Supreme Court
should enable the party to pursue enforcement on the basis of this award.

Dr Krzysztof Sienicki

12. Attachments

1. Draft translation of the Arbitration Court's rules into Swedish,

2. List of selected arbitration courts in Poland,

3. Images (received from the Arbitral Tribunal) on information boards
placed in the lobby and directly at the entrance to the Arbitral
Tribunal's office,

4. Official document confirming that the CEO of the company does not
live in the place indicated by the defendant (Podkowa Leśna).