Organised by Dr. Sara Göthlin (Director of the SCCL) and Dr. jur. h.c. André Andersson (Chair of the SCCL Board) on the Stockholm side and Prof. Birke Häcker (Schlegel Chair in Civil Law, Common Law and Comparative Law) on the Bonn side, the two-day event brought together well over forty legal scholars and some practitioners working in Sweden and Germany and allowed them to discuss fundamental questions and current legal issues in an international commercial context.

The first day, 16 April, was dedicated to a “Junior Scholar Workshop” exploring a series of specific topics and methods in comparative and interdisciplinary legal research. Sixteen doctoral and early post-doctoral candidates, eight from each institution, presented aspects of their work to each other. Presenters from Stockholm were paired with commentators from Bonn, and vice versa, thus fostering a lively and very inspirational academic exchange. Chaired by senior scholars from both sides, topics ranged from procedural to substantive matters, with a mix of different methodologies, from doctrinal to empirical and comparative approaches.

The day started with an analysis of how the argumentative burden is allocated in civil proceedings (Hanna Larsson and Dominik Zilsdorf), continued with tricky questions pertaining to intra-family property disputes (Tove Lindgren, Cecilia Baltes and Caroline Erhardt) and the contrast between functionalist and substantive concepts of property rights (Algot Bengtsson and Hannah Winter). In the afternoon, the group pondered different responses to induced mistake in contract law and the appropriate methodology for comparing them (Nils Hennig and Patryk Sapa) as well as different initiatives for stock exchange regulation and their effect on competitiveness and growth (Andreas Gustafsson and Franziska Seitz). The final two sessions both concerned the field of arbitration, asking how far newly established state commercial courts provide an attractive alternative to arbitration proceedings (Dr. Sebastian Hitzel and Johanna Böhm) and whether the widely bemoaned “judicialization” of international arbitration poses a threat to this form of dispute resolution (Ömer Bildik and Robin Ollus). 

The second day, 17 April, was subdivided into two parts. In the morning, participants gathered for a “Senior Scholar Workshop”, when it fell to more senior members of both constituencies to share some perspectives and experiences with the doctoral cohort and with each other. One session addressed the multi-faceted interface between academia and legal practice, exploring ways in which individuals and institutions can bridge these two different worlds. It was led by a mixed panel of experts who have, in different ways and directions, made the transition from one to the other and who were able to testify to how the experience was both challenging and intellectually enriching (Dr. André Andersson, Dr. Sara Göthin, Hanna Larsson, Prof. Louisa Specht-Riemenschneider, and Prof. Matthias Weller). A second panel was devoted to methodological challenges in legal research and shone a spotlight on the diversity of different approaches and to some extent on the fluidity and the grey areas between them (Prof. Laura Carlson, Prof. Emil Elgebrant, Prof. Birke Häcker, Prof. Svenja Hippel, and Prof. Alexander Scheuch). While panels members worked with and favoured a variety of methods, all agreed on the central importance of tailoring one’s methodology to fit the aim of the individual project and, in doing so, of being intellectually honest with oneself and others.      

The symposium culminated in an afternoon session tracing “The Limits of Party Autonomy” in an international commercial context. Impulse papers focused on three different fields, namely arbitration, contract law, and insolvency. Prof. Ulf Maunsbach and Prof. Matthias Weller discussed current challenges to the sanctity of arbitration agreements from the perspective of international private law as well as through the lens of anti-suit injunctions. Prof. Birke Häcker and Dr. Stina Bratt pondered actual or apparent limitations to freedom of contract both at the level of substantive rights and at the “remedial” level of enforcing these rights. Finally, Prof. Moritz Brinkmann and Prof. Johan Sandstedt analysed the avoidance provisions of the new Insolvency III Directive. In doing so, they drew attention to the pros and cons of achieving EU-wide harmonisation by what appears, in this case, to be a large-scale transplantation of German domestic rules (and problems).

Following two days of lively round-table discussions stimulated by the various topics and contributions, the Stockholm-Bonn Law Symposium 2026 concluded with a dinner allowing participants to continue their conversations in a more informal setting. Regardless of whether they had already met in 2024 or only just become acquainted, the animated chatter around the room bore testimony to their enjoyment of each other’s company. A special treat was provided by Irina Gill performing pieces by Mozart and Liszt on the grand piano, thus captivating the audience and adding a musical cherry to the proverbial cake of academic, social and culinary pleasures. The organisers are delighted that the whole event was so well-received on both sides. They look forward to continuing the collaborations and to further expanding the links between Stockholm and Bonn.