Enforcement

Enforcement can be explained somewhat simplistically as ensuring that the party entitled to be paid is actually paid.

Although enforcement often only becomes relevant when there is a judgement or decision to be enforced, it is a good idea to consider early on the possibilities of actually being paid in the event of a future judgement. Few things are less satisfying than being faced with a counterparty who is still unable to pay what the judgement says after winning in court. There are also measures that can be taken early in the process to secure the possibility of payment or prevent the other party from taking certain actions. This type of measure is also generally enforced by the Swedish Enforcement Authority, see more under Security measures.

The most common form of enforcement is otherwise what is sometimes called debt collection. This means that the Swedish Enforcement Authority enforces a judgement for payment by measuring and selling the defendant’s assets. A relatively common special case is enforcement in the form of the sale of mortgaged property. However, the enforcement of a judgement may also involve something other than payment, such as the Swedish Enforcement Authority carrying out an eviction of someone who does not leave a premises or home voluntarily.

If the Enforcement Authority does not find assets to cover the debt during debt collection, it issues a certificate that such assets are missing (so-called SUT certificate, “missing enforceable assets”). Based on the SUT certificate, the party entitled to payment can proceed with an application to declare the other party bankrupt if they do not pay the debt. Several of the lawyers at NORMA are regularly appointed as bankruptcy trustees and we therefore also have extensive experience in dealing with the issues that arise when a counterparty becomes insolvent.

One important thing to keep in mind is that the Swedish Enforcement Authority can only enforce judgements in Sweden. The Swedish Enforcement Authority can also only enforce judgements from Sweden or other countries with which we have international agreements (mainly EU countries). While Swedish judgements can also be enforced in other EU countries through their respective authorities, if your counterparty is based in, for example, the United States, a Swedish court judgment will not be enforceable. One way to avoid this type of problem is to always stipulate in international agreements that disputes should be resolved through arbitration. Virtually all the countries of the world have agreed that arbitral awards should be enforceable regardless of where the proceedings took place and which country’s law was applied in the proceedings.