Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

En advokats skadeståndsansvar - med särskilt fokus på Setterwalls-målet ur ett prejudikatperspektiv

Ibrahim, Georg LU (2018) LAGF03 20182
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
Due to the fact that legal cases have recently emerged regarding a lawyer's liability for damages vis-à-vis his client, the conditions for this are clarified on the basis of the Court of Appeal over Skåne and Blekinge, case no. T1775-17, "Setterwalls case" and NJA 2018 s. 414, “A lawyer's liability for damages ”.

A lawyer is, under contract law, liable to his client for any damage caused as a result of careless counseling. A prerequisite is that the mediated council falls within the lawyer's professional practice. In accordance with general contractual principles, adequate causality is required between the damaging act and the damage that has arisen.

In order for liability to be upheld, the lawyer must have been careless in his... (More)
Due to the fact that legal cases have recently emerged regarding a lawyer's liability for damages vis-à-vis his client, the conditions for this are clarified on the basis of the Court of Appeal over Skåne and Blekinge, case no. T1775-17, "Setterwalls case" and NJA 2018 s. 414, “A lawyer's liability for damages ”.

A lawyer is, under contract law, liable to his client for any damage caused as a result of careless counseling. A prerequisite is that the mediated council falls within the lawyer's professional practice. In accordance with general contractual principles, adequate causality is required between the damaging act and the damage that has arisen.

In order for liability to be upheld, the lawyer must have been careless in his actions. Hereby, a culpable assessment must be made based on the obligations and responsibilities of a lawyer. The responsibility is characterized by the knowledge a lawyer is supposed to have in his capacity as a legal expert and a member of the bar.

The circumstances of the Setterwalls case differ from previous cases that the Supreme Court has decided on careless counseling. The counseling situation in the Setterwalls case can be said to have been reactive while in previous cases, or as in the lawyer's liability for damages, it has been a question of proactive occupation.

From a precedent perspective, the Supreme court should include in the culpable assessment the risks of injury suffered by the injured party - which it is also aware of. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Med anledning av att det på senare tid dykt upp rättsfall vad gäller en advokats skadeståndsansvar gentemot sin klient klarläggs förutsättningarna för detta utifrån Hovrätten över Skåne och Blekinge, mål nr T 1775-17, ”Setterwalls-målet” samt NJA 2018 s. 414, ”Advokats skadeståndsansvar”.

En advokat är på kontrakträttslig grund ansvarig gentemot sin klient för skada som vållats till följd av vårdslös rådgivning. En förutsättning är att det förmedlade rådet faller inom advokatens yrkesmässiga utövning. I enlighet med allmänna kontrakträttsliga principer krävs adekvat kausalitet mellan den skadebringande handlingen och den skada som har uppkommit.

För att skadeståndsansvar ska aktualiseras krävs att advokaten har varit vårdslös i sitt... (More)
Med anledning av att det på senare tid dykt upp rättsfall vad gäller en advokats skadeståndsansvar gentemot sin klient klarläggs förutsättningarna för detta utifrån Hovrätten över Skåne och Blekinge, mål nr T 1775-17, ”Setterwalls-målet” samt NJA 2018 s. 414, ”Advokats skadeståndsansvar”.

En advokat är på kontrakträttslig grund ansvarig gentemot sin klient för skada som vållats till följd av vårdslös rådgivning. En förutsättning är att det förmedlade rådet faller inom advokatens yrkesmässiga utövning. I enlighet med allmänna kontrakträttsliga principer krävs adekvat kausalitet mellan den skadebringande handlingen och den skada som har uppkommit.

För att skadeståndsansvar ska aktualiseras krävs att advokaten har varit vårdslös i sitt agerande. Härmed ska en culpabedömning göras utifrån de skyldigheter och ansvar en advokat har. Ansvaret präglas av de kunskaper en advokat förutsätts ha i sin egenskap av juridisk expert och ledamot av advokatsamfundet.

Omständigheterna i Setterwalls-målet skiljer sig från tidigare mål som Högsta domstolen har avgjort vid vårdslös rådgivning. Rådgivningssituationen i Setterwalls-målet kan sägas ha varit reaktiv medan det i tidigare mål, eller som i Advokatens skadestådsansvar, har varit fråga om proaktiv yrkesutövning.

Ur ett prejudikatperspektiv bör HD inkludera i culpabedömningen de av den skadelidande parten tillskjutna risker för skada – som den dessutom är medvetandes om. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Ibrahim, Georg LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20182
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Skatterätt, Skadestånd.
language
Swedish
id
8965948
date added to LUP
2019-03-17 14:15:37
date last changed
2019-03-17 14:15:37
@misc{8965948,
  abstract     = {{Due to the fact that legal cases have recently emerged regarding a lawyer's liability for damages vis-à-vis his client, the conditions for this are clarified on the basis of the Court of Appeal over Skåne and Blekinge, case no. T1775-17, "Setterwalls case" and NJA 2018 s. 414, “A lawyer's liability for damages ”.

A lawyer is, under contract law, liable to his client for any damage caused as a result of careless counseling. A prerequisite is that the mediated council falls within the lawyer's professional practice. In accordance with general contractual principles, adequate causality is required between the damaging act and the damage that has arisen.

In order for liability to be upheld, the lawyer must have been careless in his actions. Hereby, a culpable assessment must be made based on the obligations and responsibilities of a lawyer. The responsibility is characterized by the knowledge a lawyer is supposed to have in his capacity as a legal expert and a member of the bar.

The circumstances of the Setterwalls case differ from previous cases that the Supreme Court has decided on careless counseling. The counseling situation in the Setterwalls case can be said to have been reactive while in previous cases, or as in the lawyer's liability for damages, it has been a question of proactive occupation.

From a precedent perspective, the Supreme court should include in the culpable assessment the risks of injury suffered by the injured party - which it is also aware of.}},
  author       = {{Ibrahim, Georg}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{En advokats skadeståndsansvar - med särskilt fokus på Setterwalls-målet ur ett prejudikatperspektiv}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}