Schjødt in the courts – Q1 and Q2 2024

Schjødt has one of the region's strongest commercial and civil litigation groups. We regard litigation to be a field of expertise, which is better left to specialised litigators. This has historical ties going back to our founder, Annæus Schjødt; a renowned Norwegian litigator. Since then, dispute resolution has remained a core area of practice for Schjødt.

The firm's standing litigation practice includes acting for financial institutions, corporations of all sizes, individuals, insurers and litigation funders, with particular expertise in the energy, construction, infrastructure, pharmaceuticals, intellectual property, financial, property and maritime sectors. In addition, we have a highly regarded internal investigation and white-collar criminal defence practice, which makes Schjødt stand out from our competitors.

Many of our largest cases are international arbitration cases.

Schjødt's lawyers are also in the front row when it comes to public interest cases: We handle a large number of cases concerning fundamental legal issues and human rights. 

Here are some key numbers as per second quarter 2024:

• Schjødt's litigation department consists of over 50 litigation specialists across all of Schjødt's offices: Oslo, Bergen, Stavanger, Ålesund, Stockholm, Copenhagen and London.
• 16 of our lawyers are certified to argue cases before the Norwegian Supreme court, and several lawyers have served as judges in their careers, with a number of others regularly being appointed as arbitrators.
• Schjødt has assisted its clients in five civil cases before the Norwegian Supreme Court in the first six months of 2024. 

Schjødt's litigation lawyers assist not only in commercial cases, but also in cases protecting people's right to freedom of speech, freedom of press and human rights more generally. 

Schjødt has a long tradition of fearless advocacy, including providing assistance to people with limited resources as part of our pro bono practice. This work is important both to these individual clients and in its contribution to the development of important legal issues. Since the year 2000, Schjødt has argued 71 cases concerning human rights before the Norwegian Supreme Court.

Time-barring of claims under EC 261/2004 – the Norwegian Aviation Act section 2

Schjødt partner Sigurd Holter Torp has recently assisted SAS and NHO Luftfart in a case of principle before the Supreme Court, against AirHelp Ltd. The question was whether a claim under EC 261/2004 (common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights) becomes time-barred after three years according to the general rule in the Norwegian Limitation Act section 2, or two years according to the special rule in the Norwegian Aviation Act section 10-29. The Supreme Court's majority, consisting of three judges, concluded that the deadline was three years. The minority of two judges concluded that the deadline was two years.

The employer's obligations to adjust working time schedule for an employee under the Norwegian Working Environment Act

Partner Martin Jetlund represented the employer, an oil service company, in a case regarding the employer's obligations to adjust the working time schedule for an employee, pursuant to the Norwegian Working Environment Act. On 28 February 2024, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favour of our client and concluded that the employee, who had health issues, was not entitled to be exempted from night work. This was the first case regarding exemption from night work before any courts in Norway (HR-2024-423-A). Additionally, with the Norwegian regulation being based on the EU Working Time Directive, the ruling has received international attention as this is the first Supreme Court ruling from any EU/EEA country on this matter, according to our knowledge.

The Insurance Contract Act § 8-1 – the interpretation of "must understand" (No: "må forstå")

Partner Arild Christian Dyngeland represented a client in case HR-2024-989-A before the Supreme Court in May 2024. The Supreme Court interpreted "must understand" (No: "må forstå") in the Insurance Contract Act § 8-1. The Supreme Court repealed the Appeal Court judgement and stated that the "must understand" was a question of legal interpretation and not evidence assessment.

Determining the relevant basis for fee calculation

Partner Hallvard Gilje Aarseth acted for the seller in one of the larger real estate portfolio transactions in recent years, in a dispute with the facilitator handling the transaction. The facilitator claimed additional fees, which the seller refused to pay, which again caused the facilitator to take legal actions against the seller. The root cause of the dispute was conflicting views on how to determine the relevant basis for the fee calculation. Schjødt's client has so far succeeded both in the District Court and the Court of Appeal (LB-2023-137937).

The Grindr Case 

Schjødt's head of IT & Technology, Eva Jarbekk, partner Halvard Helle, and senior associate Anna Eide represented Grindr in a court case against the Norwegian Privacy Appeals Board (Personvernnemnda). In 2021, Grindr received an administrative fine of NOK 65 million from the Norwegian Data Protection Authority related to Grindr's former consent mechanism. This decision was upheld by the Norwegian Privacy Appeals Board.

Grindr challenged the decision in court, arguing that they had obtained valid consents for the disclosure of personal data to advertising partners for behavioural marketing. Grindr also contended that the sharing of IP addresses, AD-ID, location information, self-reported age and gender, App-ID, and technical device information did not reveal a person's sex life or sexual orientation. Furthermore, Grindr argued that the Norwegian Privacy Appeals Board's interpretation was discriminatory and violated Norway's EEA obligations. A ruling in the case is expected to be right around the corner.

Patent dispute between Rottefella and Amer

Partners Halvor Manshaus and Thomas Hagen, and Senior Associate Anna Eide, represents Rottefella in an upcoming patent dispute against Amer, Salomon and Atomic. The case concerns the question of whether Amer's new bindings infringe on Rottefella's patent. The Schjødt team has previously assisted Rottefella and Madshus against Amer in the Shift-in case (LB-2022-159367) that also revolved around the same Rottefella patent, where Rottefella and Madshus were awarded NOK 9,2 million as compensation for patent infringements.

Arbitration: Post M&A dispute

Schjødt partner Trond Sollund and Senior Lawyer Anders Ødegård represented a client in ad hoc arbitration proceedings in a post M&A dispute. The proceedings were held in Schjødt's arbitration facilities in Oslo, in May this year. The core of the matter was whether the conditions for contingent payments of up to 20 MUSD were fulfilled. These were linked to what constituted the commencement of a project. An unanimous tribunal ruled in favour of Schjødt's client.