DCFR - En rättskälla i svensk rätt?
(2011) JURM02 20112Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Uppsatsens syfte är att undersöka och diskutera om the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) är en rättskälla i svensk rätt. Detta görs genom att redogöra för argument för och emot referensramen som svensk rättskälla. Denna fråga är viktig att utreda då det finns skilda meningar om detta bland den svenska juridiska doktrinen. Detta skapar ett osäkert rättsläge som kan ge upphov till osäkerhet inför rättsäkerheten samt ineffektiva processer.
DCFR är ett resultat av många års samarbete mellan EU-ländernas rättsliga experter i arbetet att kartlägga de europeiska kontraktsrättsliga principer som gäller i Europa. År 2009 stod verket klart. Senare samma år hänvisade Högsta domstolen (HD) i sina domskäl till DCFR i NJA 2009 s. 672. Efter... (More) - Uppsatsens syfte är att undersöka och diskutera om the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) är en rättskälla i svensk rätt. Detta görs genom att redogöra för argument för och emot referensramen som svensk rättskälla. Denna fråga är viktig att utreda då det finns skilda meningar om detta bland den svenska juridiska doktrinen. Detta skapar ett osäkert rättsläge som kan ge upphov till osäkerhet inför rättsäkerheten samt ineffektiva processer.
DCFR är ett resultat av många års samarbete mellan EU-ländernas rättsliga experter i arbetet att kartlägga de europeiska kontraktsrättsliga principer som gäller i Europa. År 2009 stod verket klart. Senare samma år hänvisade Högsta domstolen (HD) i sina domskäl till DCFR i NJA 2009 s. 672. Efter domstolen hade gjort denna hänvisning blossade en het debatt upp om HD hade gjort rätt som hänvisade till dessa bestämmelser och om DCFR:s legitimitet som rättskälla i vårt svenska rättsystem. DCFR kallas idag för ett akademiskt utkast. Referensramen saknar grund i någon av Europeiska unionens (EU) institutioner och omfattas av den europeiska benämningen soft law. Soft law är inte rättsligt bindande.
I denna uppsats redogörs inledningsvis för referensramen samt vilka rättskällor som finns inom den svenska rätten. Dessa avsnitt lägger grunden för att se om DCFR passar in i våra svenska rättskällor. HD hänvisade till referensramen i sina domskäl genom avtalsutfyllning. I ett avsnitt redogörs för DCFR:s påverkan på den svenska rätten samt för i vilka fall domstolen får göra en avtalsutfyllning. I det sista deskriptiva avsnittet har åtta författares åsikter om DCFR som svensk rättskälla sammanfattats.
Slutsatsen är att domstolen får se till DCFR i inspirationssyfte i de fall de måste fylla ut ett avtal och det saknas svenska lagregler samt praxis på området. Emellertid omfattas inte verket av de svenska rättskällorna som måste beaktas av domstolen i dagens läge. Men vad DCFR faktiskt får för status bland de svenska rättskällorna genom NJA 2009 s. 672 får fastställs av framtida domstolsavgöranden.
Som en mindre utvikning från själva frågeställningen innehåller uppsatsen resultatet av en enkät som skickades ut till olika juridiska institutioner i Sverige. Deltagandet var fåtaligt men resultatet bland dem var tydligt. DCFR är inte förankrat hos praktiserande jurister i dagens läge. (Less) - Abstract
- This thesis deals with the question of whether or not the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) is a source of law in the Swedish legal system. This is done by outlining the arguments for and against the frame of reference as a Swedish law source. This issue is important to investigate because of the disagreement among the swedish judical experts whether it is or not. This legal uncertainty creates doubt about the legal security of the legal system and cause inefficient judical processes.
DCFR is the result of many years cooperation between the EU countries' legal experts working towards finding the common principles in the Member States contract law. In 2009 the framework was completed. Later that year, the Supreme Court referred to... (More) - This thesis deals with the question of whether or not the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) is a source of law in the Swedish legal system. This is done by outlining the arguments for and against the frame of reference as a Swedish law source. This issue is important to investigate because of the disagreement among the swedish judical experts whether it is or not. This legal uncertainty creates doubt about the legal security of the legal system and cause inefficient judical processes.
DCFR is the result of many years cooperation between the EU countries' legal experts working towards finding the common principles in the Member States contract law. In 2009 the framework was completed. Later that year, the Supreme Court referred to the DCFR in their decision in NJA 2009 s. 672. After the court had made this reference, a heated debate began on the question whether the Sumpreme Court’s decision making was correct in referring to these provisions and the legitimacy of DCFR within the Swedish legal system. DCFR has the status of an academic text today, where the framework is not a product of the EU institutions, and is covered by the European term soft law. Soft law is not a legally binding act.
This thesis deals initially with DCFR and the legal sources in the Swedish law system. This section works as the foundation to see if DCFR fits into our sources of law. There is a section about Supreme Court's judging in NJA 2009 s. 672, where the court refers to the framework when they did not find any other rules or case law. This section also describes in which cases the court may refer to other sources when they do not find any legitimate sources for the case. In the final descriptive chapter has eight authors’ opinions on DCFR as a Swedish law source been summarized.
The conclusion to the question in this thesis is that the court can look to the rules in the DCFR. The court can do this when they are searching for inspiration in the constructions of contracts and there is a lack of Swedish legal rules and case law. However, DCFR is not a document that is covered by the Swedish legal sources and therefor the court is not obligated to apply these. Actually, the status of DCFR after the Supreme Courts reference will be determined by court decisions in the future.
As a minor digression from the main question the thesis contains the results of a survey sent out to various legal institutions in Sweden. Participation was minimal, but the results among them was clear. DCFR is not established among the justice practitioners in Sweden today. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/2204733
- author
- Svennerstad, Sanna LU
- supervisor
-
- Ola Svensson LU
- organization
- alternative title
- DCFR - A Source of Law in the Swedish Legal System?
- course
- JURM02 20112
- year
- 2011
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Avtalsrätt, Rättskälla, DCFR, Allmän rättslära, EU-rätt, EU law, Rättssociologi
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 2204733
- date added to LUP
- 2011-11-17 14:49:36
- date last changed
- 2011-11-17 14:50:30
@misc{2204733,
abstract = {{This thesis deals with the question of whether or not the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR) is a source of law in the Swedish legal system. This is done by outlining the arguments for and against the frame of reference as a Swedish law source. This issue is important to investigate because of the disagreement among the swedish judical experts whether it is or not. This legal uncertainty creates doubt about the legal security of the legal system and cause inefficient judical processes.
DCFR is the result of many years cooperation between the EU countries' legal experts working towards finding the common principles in the Member States contract law. In 2009 the framework was completed. Later that year, the Supreme Court referred to the DCFR in their decision in NJA 2009 s. 672. After the court had made this reference, a heated debate began on the question whether the Sumpreme Court’s decision making was correct in referring to these provisions and the legitimacy of DCFR within the Swedish legal system. DCFR has the status of an academic text today, where the framework is not a product of the EU institutions, and is covered by the European term soft law. Soft law is not a legally binding act.
This thesis deals initially with DCFR and the legal sources in the Swedish law system. This section works as the foundation to see if DCFR fits into our sources of law. There is a section about Supreme Court's judging in NJA 2009 s. 672, where the court refers to the framework when they did not find any other rules or case law. This section also describes in which cases the court may refer to other sources when they do not find any legitimate sources for the case. In the final descriptive chapter has eight authors’ opinions on DCFR as a Swedish law source been summarized.
The conclusion to the question in this thesis is that the court can look to the rules in the DCFR. The court can do this when they are searching for inspiration in the constructions of contracts and there is a lack of Swedish legal rules and case law. However, DCFR is not a document that is covered by the Swedish legal sources and therefor the court is not obligated to apply these. Actually, the status of DCFR after the Supreme Courts reference will be determined by court decisions in the future.
As a minor digression from the main question the thesis contains the results of a survey sent out to various legal institutions in Sweden. Participation was minimal, but the results among them was clear. DCFR is not established among the justice practitioners in Sweden today.}},
author = {{Svennerstad, Sanna}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{DCFR - En rättskälla i svensk rätt?}},
year = {{2011}},
}