Paw Fruerlund

Paw Fruerlund has in-depth expertise in dispute resolution through litigation and arbitration proceedings, as well as legal investigations. He and his team provide assistance in three areas:

• Disputes concerning public authority matters in Denmark (i.e. State, regional and municipal authorities). Matters on what the public authority is allowed to do, whether a decision is valid, whether the public authority is liable for damages, etc.
• Complex (commercial and non-commercial) disputes. Matters with great technical or legal complexity. Large court and arbitration proceedings concerning e.g. IT systems, mining, large sets of related contracts, etc. Matters where the team benefit from their deep insight into process handling, case management and handling of large sets of related cases.
• Human rights disputes. Matters concerning the limits of authority interference with the human rights of citizens and on State duty to protect the human rights of citizens.

Over the years, Paw has handled and litigated a huge number of cases at all levels of the Danish legal system and arbitration cases. Paw has been involved in many high-profile and leading cases in Denmark, including the Supreme Court, the high courts and arbitration. In addition, Paw has taught dispute resolution as an external university lecturer and acts as an arbitrator.

As head of one of the litigation teams at Poul Schmith, which includes some of the most skilled dispute specialists in Denmark, Paw brings the team’s extensive experience, strategic and tactical skills into play for the benefit of his clients. He is known for his ability to be creative and to have a constructive and proactive approach rather than simply focusing on the law. Paw and his team are trusted advisors and have gained high esteem in dispute resolution. Clients praise Paw for being an extremely qualified attorney who understands the importance of listening to their needs and concerns. He acts and responds to the needs and concerns while considering how best to position them in the court or arbitral proceedings. Client confidence in his and the team’s advice and the cooperation established is very high.

Paw and his team provide legal advice at a very high professional level. He has a good insight and understanding of the area in which his clients operate and is an invaluable legal advisor. With a proactive approach, he delivers services that exceed expectations and solve legal challenges with both integrity and an innovative mindset.

Selected published cases:

• Paw Fruerlund represents Denmark and Greenland in a case against Greenland Minerals A/S about mining in Greenland.
• He represents Aalborg Municipality in a matter concerning assessment of possible human rights violations at Gravenshoved Boarding School.
• He represents the Danish Agency for Education and Quality and the Danish Working Environment Authority in a matter of possible human rights violations at Havregården Boarding and Day School.
• He represented the Danish Complaint Board for Patient Compensation in a case before the Supreme Court concerning the understanding of ‘health expenses and other losses’ in section 1(1) of the Danish Liability and Compensation Act (UfR 2020.2448 H).
• He represented the Appeals Board in a case before the Supreme Court on whether the minimum level of compensation should be deducted from flex-salary subsidies (UfR 2020.2160 H).
• He represented the Appeals Board in a case before the Supreme Court on whether it was a violation of the Human Rights Convention to deny a woman stepchild adoption of children born to a surrogate mother (UfR 2021.517 H).
• He represented Banedanmark in a case before the Supreme Court on whether a free transport scheme for former employees could be terminated with 6 months’ notice (UfR 2021.1936 H).
• He represented the Appeals Board in two cases before the Supreme Court on whether it was a violation of the Human Rights Convention to release two children for adoption without parental consent and, in this context, temporarily place the child with the intended adopters during the proceedings (UfR 2021.2400 H and UfR 2021.4867 H).
• He represented the Probation Service in a case before the Supreme Court on whether it was contrary to the human rights of a terrorist suspect to conduct daily searches of the person and cell of the suspect (UfR 2022.3807H).
• He represented the Equal Treatment Board in a case before the Supreme Court on whether it could be unlawful discrimination to impose on an employee to work Saturdays contrary to the employee’s religion (UfR 2022.4461H).
• He represented the Immigration Appeals Board in a case before the Supreme Court on whether refusal of family reunification between a resident son and his demented mother, who was currently residing with the son, was in violation of the Human Rights Convention (UfR 2023.1059 H).
• He represented the Agency of Family Law in a case before the Supreme Court on whether a woman could be registered as a co-mother on the basis of a fertility treatment at home where the healthcare professional was not present during treatment (UfR 2023.1764 H).
• He represented the Ministry of Immigration and Integration in a case before the Supreme Court on whether a child born to a foreign mother had acquired Danish citizenship as a result of the sperm donor having Danish citizenship (UfR 2023.3542 H).
• He represented the Equal Treatment Board in a case before the Supreme Court on whether it could be unlawful discrimination to dismiss a teacher and whether a settlement prevented a review of the case in court, (under publication in the Danish Weekly Law Reports (UfR)).