Skada i följd av trafik/Skade som motorvogn gjer – en jämförande analys
(2015) JURM01 20151Department of Law
- Abstract
- This essay analyzes and compares the legal regulation of motor liability insurance in Sweden and Norway with emphasis on the primary legal requirements for the Laws to apply, namely “skada till följd av trafik” (damage as a result of motor vehicle traffic) in Sweden and “skade som motorvogn gjer” (damage caused by motor vehicle) in Norway.
These are the primary requirements that define the scope of the law and the damages that is to be settled by the mandatory motor vehicle insurance.
The findings of the essay are that according to the preparatory work of the Law, the purpose and scope are meant to be very similar. The demand for causation in both laws is also very similar.
However, the drafting of the Laws are different. The... (More) - This essay analyzes and compares the legal regulation of motor liability insurance in Sweden and Norway with emphasis on the primary legal requirements for the Laws to apply, namely “skada till följd av trafik” (damage as a result of motor vehicle traffic) in Sweden and “skade som motorvogn gjer” (damage caused by motor vehicle) in Norway.
These are the primary requirements that define the scope of the law and the damages that is to be settled by the mandatory motor vehicle insurance.
The findings of the essay are that according to the preparatory work of the Law, the purpose and scope are meant to be very similar. The demand for causation in both laws is also very similar.
However, the drafting of the Laws are different. The Swedish Law emphasizes the application to damages that occurs in connection to the normal use of the motor vehicle as a moving object of transportation.
The Norwegian Law, on the other hand, emphasizes that the Law should cover damages that is caused by the motor vehicle having a physical impact on either property or persons and as a result of that causing damage.
Or that is caused by any of the dangerous functions relating to motor vehicles.
The difference of the two laws is also made clear when studying the literature and cases determined by the courts.
It is also shown that the Courts in Sweden and Norway have, over time, increased the scope of situations and thus damages that will be covered by the mandatory motor vehicle insurance.
In the final part of the essay, I will discuss the alternative that the countries will harmonize the scope of incidents that will be covered by the vehicle insurance, either through new legislation or through extended interpretation of the current law by the Courts.
By doing so, we would have a system in place where the mandatory vehicle insurance in the two countries is more comprehensive, consistent and predicable, but with the result that further incidents will fall within the insurance. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Denna uppsats analyserar och jämför legal reglering av motorfordons ansvar vid uppkommen skada i Sverige och Norge, med fokus på rekvisiten ”skada i följd av trafik” i Sverige respektive skade som motorvogn gjer i Norge.
Dessa rekvisit är de som definierar omfånget av fordons ansvar vid uppkommen skada och därmed de skador som ska ersättas av fordonets trafikförsäkring.
Uppsatsen visar att syftet med respektive stats lagstiftning till stor del är lika, vilket kan utläsas ur historisk utveckling och förarbeten. Lagarnas ordalydelse är dock olika. Den svenska trafikskadelagen lägger stor vikt vid att lagen ska omfatta skador som uppstår vid normalt brukande av fordonet som transportmedel.
Den norska lagstiftningen lägger istället... (More) - Denna uppsats analyserar och jämför legal reglering av motorfordons ansvar vid uppkommen skada i Sverige och Norge, med fokus på rekvisiten ”skada i följd av trafik” i Sverige respektive skade som motorvogn gjer i Norge.
Dessa rekvisit är de som definierar omfånget av fordons ansvar vid uppkommen skada och därmed de skador som ska ersättas av fordonets trafikförsäkring.
Uppsatsen visar att syftet med respektive stats lagstiftning till stor del är lika, vilket kan utläsas ur historisk utveckling och förarbeten. Lagarnas ordalydelse är dock olika. Den svenska trafikskadelagen lägger stor vikt vid att lagen ska omfatta skador som uppstår vid normalt brukande av fordonet som transportmedel.
Den norska lagstiftningen lägger istället störst vikt vid att skadan uppstår till följd av att fordonets speciellt farliga egenskaper realiseras och därmed och om fordonet har en fysisk påverkan på sak eller person som skadas.
Skillnader i respektive stats rättsläge inom området förtydligas också när man undersöker doktrin och praxis.
Det avhandlas också att domstolarna i Sverige och Norge har utvidgat de ramar som finns för att avgöra om en skada ska omfattas av fordonets trafikförsäkring.
Uppsatsen avslutas med en diskussion om att en möjlig utveckling av rättsområdet i respektive stat är att rättsläget harmoniseras så att båda stater utvidgar fordonets trafikförsäkring till att omfatta skador som idag faller utanför respektive stats trafikförsäkring.
Konsekvensen av det skulle bli att en del skador som idag faller utanför lagens användningsområde i framtiden kommer att ersättas av fordonets trafikförsäkring. En sådan utveckling kan säkerställa ett mer förutsägbart och transparent rättsläge. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/7457714
- author
- Bjurvill, Peter LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- JURM01 20151
- year
- 2015
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Försäkringsrätt, ersättningsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 7457714
- date added to LUP
- 2015-06-30 17:40:03
- date last changed
- 2015-06-30 17:40:03
@misc{7457714,
abstract = {{This essay analyzes and compares the legal regulation of motor liability insurance in Sweden and Norway with emphasis on the primary legal requirements for the Laws to apply, namely “skada till följd av trafik” (damage as a result of motor vehicle traffic) in Sweden and “skade som motorvogn gjer” (damage caused by motor vehicle) in Norway.
These are the primary requirements that define the scope of the law and the damages that is to be settled by the mandatory motor vehicle insurance.
The findings of the essay are that according to the preparatory work of the Law, the purpose and scope are meant to be very similar. The demand for causation in both laws is also very similar.
However, the drafting of the Laws are different. The Swedish Law emphasizes the application to damages that occurs in connection to the normal use of the motor vehicle as a moving object of transportation.
The Norwegian Law, on the other hand, emphasizes that the Law should cover damages that is caused by the motor vehicle having a physical impact on either property or persons and as a result of that causing damage.
Or that is caused by any of the dangerous functions relating to motor vehicles.
The difference of the two laws is also made clear when studying the literature and cases determined by the courts.
It is also shown that the Courts in Sweden and Norway have, over time, increased the scope of situations and thus damages that will be covered by the mandatory motor vehicle insurance.
In the final part of the essay, I will discuss the alternative that the countries will harmonize the scope of incidents that will be covered by the vehicle insurance, either through new legislation or through extended interpretation of the current law by the Courts.
By doing so, we would have a system in place where the mandatory vehicle insurance in the two countries is more comprehensive, consistent and predicable, but with the result that further incidents will fall within the insurance.}},
author = {{Bjurvill, Peter}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Skada i följd av trafik/Skade som motorvogn gjer – en jämförande analys}},
year = {{2015}},
}