Överföringar av upplysningar och bevis mellan avtalsparter
(2010) JURM01 20102Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Denna uppsats handlar om särskilda problem som kan drabba parterna i en domstolsprocess på grund av att de har olika tillgång till relevant information. Det huvudsakliga föremålet för min undersökning har varit exempel på avtal som används för att komma tillrätta med ett ojämlikt informationsläge innan en process faktiskt inleds. För att ge en bakgrund till de avtalen börjar jag dock med att gå igenom huvuddragen i de regler som avser informationsutbyten vid avtalsslut och inom ramen för en rättegång.
En dispositiv process utmärks av att parterna har ett mycket stort ansvar för att utreda och presentera bevis. Därför är det lätt att sluta sig till att rättegången är ett dåligt verktyg för den part som är svagt rustad med fakta. Det är... (More) - Denna uppsats handlar om särskilda problem som kan drabba parterna i en domstolsprocess på grund av att de har olika tillgång till relevant information. Det huvudsakliga föremålet för min undersökning har varit exempel på avtal som används för att komma tillrätta med ett ojämlikt informationsläge innan en process faktiskt inleds. För att ge en bakgrund till de avtalen börjar jag dock med att gå igenom huvuddragen i de regler som avser informationsutbyten vid avtalsslut och inom ramen för en rättegång.
En dispositiv process utmärks av att parterna har ett mycket stort ansvar för att utreda och presentera bevis. Därför är det lätt att sluta sig till att rättegången är ett dåligt verktyg för den part som är svagt rustad med fakta. Det är dock inte hela sanningen; det finns åtskilliga exempel på hur man värnar om den som saknar information. Tillgången på processuella tvångsmedel förutsätter dock en viss kunskap om relevanta förhållanden genom att man ofta skall ange vad man söker och hur det skall användas i rättegången. Även bevisreglerna kan användas för att motverka en ojämlik tillgång på information, men utgör ingen direkt hjälp att skaffa utredning. Ingen av de processuella reglerna syftar till att ge ett direkt bistånd redan i utredningsskedet. Däremot går det att skapa sådana regler i lag eller avtal.
I den avslutande delen av uppsatsen behandlas ett antal avtalslösningar på informationsproblem som antar en särskild form: avtal om besiktning och dokumentationsskyldighet. Sådana avtal förekommer på flera områden, ofta i olika kombinationer. Reglerna kan fylla flera syften förutom bevissäkring: kontroll och gemensamt förebyggande av skador, eller förarbete till avtal om riskfördelning är några exempel. De utformas olika beroende på avtalstypen och vilket av syftena som vinner högst prioritet. I vissa fall väljs de av olika skäl bort till förmån för andra lösningar.
Avtal om besiktning, dokumentation eller annan bevissäkring uppstår enligt min uppfattning på grund av att rättsskyddet inte alltid och fullt ut kan tillgodose avtalsparternas växlande behov av upplysningar och förklaringar. De utformas, på det sätt som är karakteristiskt för avtal, utifrån parternas speciella behov. Min analys tar upp några gemensamma nämnare i avtalen och de skäl som jag tror kan påverka hur parterna reglerar sitt informationsutbyte. (Less) - Abstract
- This essay deals with specific problems that can affect the parties in court proceedings because they have different degrees of access to relevant information. The main purpose of my investigation was to find examples of contracts used to adress unequalities in the parties’ abilities as it comes to pre-trial information collectio. I begin, however, with a rough sketch of the main features of the rules related to information exchanges in the contexts of contracting and litigation.
The swedish law on civil procedure is characterized by a reliance on the parties to investigate and present all the necesary information. Therefore, it would be easy to conclude that the trial is of little use to those who cannot easily access such facts – a... (More) - This essay deals with specific problems that can affect the parties in court proceedings because they have different degrees of access to relevant information. The main purpose of my investigation was to find examples of contracts used to adress unequalities in the parties’ abilities as it comes to pre-trial information collectio. I begin, however, with a rough sketch of the main features of the rules related to information exchanges in the contexts of contracting and litigation.
The swedish law on civil procedure is characterized by a reliance on the parties to investigate and present all the necesary information. Therefore, it would be easy to conclude that the trial is of little use to those who cannot easily access such facts – a situation that is perhaps more likely to occur today than in the early days of the legislation on court proceedings. However, there are are several safeguards in place fore those who would be victims of such failings. Through the court, a party may force some communication, particularly the contribution of evidence that support the counterpart’s case. Such coercion usually presupposes that the party can explain in some detail what information he wants to access, and what he would seek to prove. Although the rules of evidence can also be used to address an unequal access to information, they offer no direct assistance to obtain it. In fact, none of the procedural rules are intended to provide direct assistance at the pre-trial investigation stage. However, it is possible to create such rules through law or contract.
The final section of this essay deals with a number of contractual solutions to information problems that adopt a specific shape: agreements on inspection or documentation. Such agreements exist in several fields, often in various combinations of the two. The rules can serve other purposes in addition to the preservation of evidence; the control of performance, joint prevention of damage, or pre-agreement allocation of risks are a few examples. The agreements are carefully designed depending on the type of contract and which purpose wins the higher priority. In some cases they appear to be dropped entirely in favour of other solutions.
In my opinion, agreements on inspection, documentation or preservation of evidence arise because the legal protection is not always and fully capable of meeting contractors' changing needs for information. They are designed, as is characteristic of contracts, based on the parties' specific needs. My analysis addresses what I believe to be some common denominators in the contracts and the reasons that affect how the parties choose to govern their information exchange. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1709523
- author
- Andersson, Sara LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Transfers of information and evidence between contracting parties
- course
- JURM01 20102
- year
- 2010
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- avtalsrätt processrätt bevisrätt contracts civil procedure
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 1709523
- date added to LUP
- 2010-10-29 09:56:38
- date last changed
- 2010-10-29 09:56:38
@misc{1709523,
abstract = {{This essay deals with specific problems that can affect the parties in court proceedings because they have different degrees of access to relevant information. The main purpose of my investigation was to find examples of contracts used to adress unequalities in the parties’ abilities as it comes to pre-trial information collectio. I begin, however, with a rough sketch of the main features of the rules related to information exchanges in the contexts of contracting and litigation.
The swedish law on civil procedure is characterized by a reliance on the parties to investigate and present all the necesary information. Therefore, it would be easy to conclude that the trial is of little use to those who cannot easily access such facts – a situation that is perhaps more likely to occur today than in the early days of the legislation on court proceedings. However, there are are several safeguards in place fore those who would be victims of such failings. Through the court, a party may force some communication, particularly the contribution of evidence that support the counterpart’s case. Such coercion usually presupposes that the party can explain in some detail what information he wants to access, and what he would seek to prove. Although the rules of evidence can also be used to address an unequal access to information, they offer no direct assistance to obtain it. In fact, none of the procedural rules are intended to provide direct assistance at the pre-trial investigation stage. However, it is possible to create such rules through law or contract.
The final section of this essay deals with a number of contractual solutions to information problems that adopt a specific shape: agreements on inspection or documentation. Such agreements exist in several fields, often in various combinations of the two. The rules can serve other purposes in addition to the preservation of evidence; the control of performance, joint prevention of damage, or pre-agreement allocation of risks are a few examples. The agreements are carefully designed depending on the type of contract and which purpose wins the higher priority. In some cases they appear to be dropped entirely in favour of other solutions.
In my opinion, agreements on inspection, documentation or preservation of evidence arise because the legal protection is not always and fully capable of meeting contractors' changing needs for information. They are designed, as is characteristic of contracts, based on the parties' specific needs. My analysis addresses what I believe to be some common denominators in the contracts and the reasons that affect how the parties choose to govern their information exchange.}},
author = {{Andersson, Sara}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Överföringar av upplysningar och bevis mellan avtalsparter}},
year = {{2010}},
}