Jura novit curia
(2014) LAGF03 20132Faculty of Law
Department of Law
- Abstract
- Iura novit curia implies that the parties cannot, with binding effect for the court, choose which law should be applied. Nor can they choose how the law should be interpreted or applied. The purpose of this paper was to investigate whether the extent of the principle of iura novit curia in Swedish law is balanced. If not so, the aim is to provide suggestions for a better solution. Iura novit curia has manly three functions: a social function, to stabilize the application of the law.
The principle at hand offers both positive and negative effects on the predictability. The court may apply a law which the parties had no reason to anticipate. This causes the application of the law to be surprising. Thus, this has negative effects on the... (More) - Iura novit curia implies that the parties cannot, with binding effect for the court, choose which law should be applied. Nor can they choose how the law should be interpreted or applied. The purpose of this paper was to investigate whether the extent of the principle of iura novit curia in Swedish law is balanced. If not so, the aim is to provide suggestions for a better solution. Iura novit curia has manly three functions: a social function, to stabilize the application of the law.
The principle at hand offers both positive and negative effects on the predictability. The court may apply a law which the parties had no reason to anticipate. This causes the application of the law to be surprising. Thus, this has negative effects on the predictability. However, it is also conceivable that iura novit curia offers positive effects concerning the predictability, but in a more general perspective. Behind this lies the idea that it would be impossible to regard the application of law as an expression of “gällande rätt” if the judgements were based on the parties dispositions of the law.
Some influence is however given to the parties when it comes to the legal qualification, which was illustrated in NJA 1983 s. 3. It’s difficult to draw any conclusion from this case more than the fact that the parties do have some influence. The problem with surprising application of law has been solved by a recommendation that the court should allow the parties to comment on the qualification which the court has made. One problem with this method is that the courts impartiality can come into questioning. Also it’s only a recommendation which means that surprising application of law still can occur. With regard to the interpretation and application of law the parties have no influence. They do, however, have the opportunity speak their own opinions on how the law should be interpreted and applied.
Surprising application of law is also contrary to the “dispositionsprincip” (a principle which determines the parties influence on the process). This principle contains all of the possibilities the parties have to bind the court by. This principle is, in brief, based on the idea that individuals should have the opportunity to themselves choose how to defend their economic interests. “Dispostionsprincipen” contain some possibilities of which the parties can affect the application of the law. In summary the parties do have some possibilities through these to bind the court to their legal qualification. And these cover more of a possibility to do so than the above mentioned influence. My conclusion is that the principle of iura novit curia is balanced as insofar concerning functions of the principle. The problems however, are not adequately solved. My proposed solution is that there should be a “åberopsbörda” (which means that the court cannot regard any circumstances which the parties have not mentioned) regarding which law should be applied. This way the problem with surprising application of law is solved and still de interests iura novit curia aims to protect would not be violated. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Jura novit curia anses innebära att parterna inte kan binda domstolen vid vilken rättsregel som är tillämplig. Och inte heller hur denna rättsregel ska tolkas och tillämpas. Denna princip vållar emellertid vissa problem. Syftet med denna uppsats har varit att utreda om principen om jura novit curias omfattning enligt gällande rätt är välavvägd samt att annars ge förslag på bättre lösningar. Principen om jura novit curia anses bygga på framför allt ha tre funktioner: en social funktion, att stabilisera rättstillämpnigen samt att leda till en jämn arbetsfördelning mellan domstolen och parterna.
Jura novit curia har både positiva och negativa effekter på förutsebarheten. Genom domstolen kan tillämpa en rättsregel som parterna inte alls... (More) - Jura novit curia anses innebära att parterna inte kan binda domstolen vid vilken rättsregel som är tillämplig. Och inte heller hur denna rättsregel ska tolkas och tillämpas. Denna princip vållar emellertid vissa problem. Syftet med denna uppsats har varit att utreda om principen om jura novit curias omfattning enligt gällande rätt är välavvägd samt att annars ge förslag på bättre lösningar. Principen om jura novit curia anses bygga på framför allt ha tre funktioner: en social funktion, att stabilisera rättstillämpnigen samt att leda till en jämn arbetsfördelning mellan domstolen och parterna.
Jura novit curia har både positiva och negativa effekter på förutsebarheten. Genom domstolen kan tillämpa en rättsregel som parterna inte alls hänfört sig till kommer rättstillämpningen att te sig överraskande. Sålunda innebär detta negativa effekter på förutsebarheten. Däremot är det också tänkbart att jura novit curia gynnar förutsebarheten fast i ett mer allmänt perspektiv. Tanken bakom detta går ut på att det skulle bli omöjligt att se rättstillämpningen som ett uttryck för gällande rätt om domarna grundades på parternas rättsliga dispositioner.
När det kommer den rättsliga kvalifikationen har parterna visst inflytande. Detta illustrerades i rättsfallen NJA 1983 s. 3 Det är svårt att dra några slutsatser av detta fall mer än att parterna har givits inflytande. Domstolen anses som nämnts kunna företa en kvalifikation även om parterna inte alls används sig av den vilket leder till överraskande rättstillämpning. Problemet med överraskande rättstillämpning är att parternas rättssäkerhet äventyras, alltså förutsebarheten. I gällande rätt har detta löst med en rekommendation att domstolen bör låta parterna yttra sig över den gjorda kvalifikation. Detta sker genom materiell processledning.
Den materiella processledningen är problematisk eftersom den kan leda till att domstolens opartiskhet ifrågasätts. Dessutom föreligger inte någon obligatorisk materiell processledning vilket innebär att överraskande rättstillämpning fortfarande kan förekomma. Vad gäller tolkning och tillämpning av rättsregler äger parterna inget inflytande. Däremot har de möjlighet att argumentera i rättsfrågan.
Problemet med överraskande rättstillämpning kan sägas strida mot dispositionsprincipen. Denna princip omfattar alla de processhandlingar som parterna kan företa och binda rätten vid. Kortfattat bygger principen på att enskilda själva ska ha möjlighet att bevaka sina ekonomiska intressen. Några av de processhandlingar som infattas i begreppet ger dessutom parterna dispostionsmöjligheter över rättstillämpningen. De som behandlas i denna uppsats är yrkandet, åberopsbördan, förlikning, medgivandet samt erkännandet. Genom yrkandet kan part helt och hållet binda domstolen vid en rättslig kvalifikation. Vad gäller åberopsbördan kan parterna indirekt påverka rättstillämpningen genom att välja vilka omständigheter domstolen får beakta vid sin prövning. Både medgivande och förlikning innebär att domstolens rättsprövning helt och hållet uteblir. Genom erkännandet ges parterna möjlighet att disponera över den rättsliga kvalifikationen. Min slutsats blev att jura novit curia tillgodoser de intressen som principen är tänkt att understödja. Däremot tycks inte de problem som principen vållar ha fått någon adekvat lösning. Mitt lösningsförslag blev att det bör införas en åberopsbörda avseende rättsregler. Detta skulle lösa problemet överraskande rättstillämpning samtidigt som de intressen jura novit curia bygger på inte skulle kränkas. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4228853
- author
- Carlsson, Andreas LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20132
- year
- 2014
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- jura novit curia, dispositionsprincipen, rättssäkerhet
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4228853
- date added to LUP
- 2014-03-04 12:47:22
- date last changed
- 2014-03-04 12:47:22
@misc{4228853,
abstract = {{Iura novit curia implies that the parties cannot, with binding effect for the court, choose which law should be applied. Nor can they choose how the law should be interpreted or applied. The purpose of this paper was to investigate whether the extent of the principle of iura novit curia in Swedish law is balanced. If not so, the aim is to provide suggestions for a better solution. Iura novit curia has manly three functions: a social function, to stabilize the application of the law.
The principle at hand offers both positive and negative effects on the predictability. The court may apply a law which the parties had no reason to anticipate. This causes the application of the law to be surprising. Thus, this has negative effects on the predictability. However, it is also conceivable that iura novit curia offers positive effects concerning the predictability, but in a more general perspective. Behind this lies the idea that it would be impossible to regard the application of law as an expression of “gällande rätt” if the judgements were based on the parties dispositions of the law.
Some influence is however given to the parties when it comes to the legal qualification, which was illustrated in NJA 1983 s. 3. It’s difficult to draw any conclusion from this case more than the fact that the parties do have some influence. The problem with surprising application of law has been solved by a recommendation that the court should allow the parties to comment on the qualification which the court has made. One problem with this method is that the courts impartiality can come into questioning. Also it’s only a recommendation which means that surprising application of law still can occur. With regard to the interpretation and application of law the parties have no influence. They do, however, have the opportunity speak their own opinions on how the law should be interpreted and applied.
Surprising application of law is also contrary to the “dispositionsprincip” (a principle which determines the parties influence on the process). This principle contains all of the possibilities the parties have to bind the court by. This principle is, in brief, based on the idea that individuals should have the opportunity to themselves choose how to defend their economic interests. “Dispostionsprincipen” contain some possibilities of which the parties can affect the application of the law. In summary the parties do have some possibilities through these to bind the court to their legal qualification. And these cover more of a possibility to do so than the above mentioned influence. My conclusion is that the principle of iura novit curia is balanced as insofar concerning functions of the principle. The problems however, are not adequately solved. My proposed solution is that there should be a “åberopsbörda” (which means that the court cannot regard any circumstances which the parties have not mentioned) regarding which law should be applied. This way the problem with surprising application of law is solved and still de interests iura novit curia aims to protect would not be violated.}},
author = {{Carlsson, Andreas}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Jura novit curia}},
year = {{2014}},
}