Kostnadsersättning i förvaltningsprocessen - Om enskildas möjligheter att få ersättning för rättegångskostnader
(2021) JURM02 20211Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- The general rule concerning legal costs in administrative procedure – with exception to tax cases – are set-off. Each of the litigants are responsible for their own court costs. This compensation model is motivated by the authority’s responsibility to investigate, and the idea that legal costs are a part of the citizenship. Furthermore, it has never been called for to pass a certain rule of cost in the administrative procedure since individuals legal costs can be compensated by the means of damages.
The possibilities to obtain compensation for legal costs also touches the issue of the right to a fair trial. The right has affected the distribution of costs in the general court. It can be found in case law from the Supreme Court, where... (More) - The general rule concerning legal costs in administrative procedure – with exception to tax cases – are set-off. Each of the litigants are responsible for their own court costs. This compensation model is motivated by the authority’s responsibility to investigate, and the idea that legal costs are a part of the citizenship. Furthermore, it has never been called for to pass a certain rule of cost in the administrative procedure since individuals legal costs can be compensated by the means of damages.
The possibilities to obtain compensation for legal costs also touches the issue of the right to a fair trial. The right has affected the distribution of costs in the general court. It can be found in case law from the Supreme Court, where the court deviated from the current cost rules with reference to the right to a fair trial. The Supreme Administrative Court has, in turn, not awarded individual parts compensation for court costs with reference to the right to a fair trial. A legal situation where the set-off rule for administrative court applies without exception, has been criticized. In a legislative context, it has been considered unacceptable and offensive that individuals in some cases may be forced to bear procedural costs, particularly if they have been considered unreasonable. Despite this, the set-off rule is the dominant rule in the Administrative Court.
This thesis has reviewed and clarified the law regarding legal costs in administrative courts. In addition, it has been reviewed whether the compensation model is compatible with the law of damages and the right to a fair trial. It can be concluded that the possibility to receive compensation for legal costs in administrative courts are limited and that criticism can be directed to the underlying reasons for the current regulation. Finally, it can be concluded that the current regulation, to some extent, is compatible with the right to damages, but that it may in some cases conflict with the right to a fair trial. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Huvudregeln i förvaltningsprocessen – med undantag för skattemålen – är kvittning, det vill säga att vardera part står för sina egna rättegångskostnader. Ersättningsmodellen motiveras bland annat av myndigheternas utredningsansvar och idén om att enskildas rättegångskostnader i förvaltningsmål utgör en naturlig del av medborgarskapet. Vidare har det inte ansetts vara påkallat att införa en särskild kostnadsregel i förvaltningsprocessen eftersom den enskildes rättegångskostnader kan ersättas i form av ett skadestånd.
Att enskilda inte tilldelas ersättning för rättegångskostnader tangerar även frågan om rätten till rättvis rättegång. Rättigheten har fått effekt beträffande kostnadsfördelningen i allmän domstol. Detta visar praxis från... (More) - Huvudregeln i förvaltningsprocessen – med undantag för skattemålen – är kvittning, det vill säga att vardera part står för sina egna rättegångskostnader. Ersättningsmodellen motiveras bland annat av myndigheternas utredningsansvar och idén om att enskildas rättegångskostnader i förvaltningsmål utgör en naturlig del av medborgarskapet. Vidare har det inte ansetts vara påkallat att införa en särskild kostnadsregel i förvaltningsprocessen eftersom den enskildes rättegångskostnader kan ersättas i form av ett skadestånd.
Att enskilda inte tilldelas ersättning för rättegångskostnader tangerar även frågan om rätten till rättvis rättegång. Rättigheten har fått effekt beträffande kostnadsfördelningen i allmän domstol. Detta visar praxis från Högsta domstolen där avsteg från kostnadsregler har gjorts med hänvisning till rätten till en rättvis rättegång. Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen har inte tillerkänt enskild part ersättning för rättegångskostnader med hänvisning till rättigheten. En ordning där förvaltningsmålens kvittningsregel gäller undantagslöst har kritiserats av flera aktörer. I lagstiftningssammanhang har det ansetts oacceptabelt och stötande att de enskilda i vissa fall kan tvingas stå för processkostnader, särskild om kostnaderna varit oskäliga. Trots detta kvarstår kvittningsregeln som dominerande kostnadsregel i förvaltningsmål.
Förevarande arbete har undersökt och klarlagt gällande rätt avseende kostnadsfördelningen i förvaltningsmål men även ersättningsmodellens förenlighet med skadeståndsrätten och rätten till rättvis rättegång. Det kan konstateras att möjligheten att få ersättning för rättegångskostnader i förvaltningsrättsliga måltyper är begränsad. Kritik kan även riktas mot den nuvarande regleringens bakomliggande skäl. Slutligen är dagens reglering till viss mån förenlig med skadeståndsrätten, medan den i vissa fall kan komma att strida mot rätten till rättvis rättegång. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9046387
- author
- Sandgrim, Emil LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Reimbursement of costs in the administrative procedure - About individuals opportunities to obtain reimbursement of legal costs
- course
- JURM02 20211
- year
- 2021
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- förvaltningsrätt, skadeståndsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9046387
- date added to LUP
- 2021-06-10 22:16:15
- date last changed
- 2021-06-10 22:16:15
@misc{9046387,
abstract = {{The general rule concerning legal costs in administrative procedure – with exception to tax cases – are set-off. Each of the litigants are responsible for their own court costs. This compensation model is motivated by the authority’s responsibility to investigate, and the idea that legal costs are a part of the citizenship. Furthermore, it has never been called for to pass a certain rule of cost in the administrative procedure since individuals legal costs can be compensated by the means of damages.
The possibilities to obtain compensation for legal costs also touches the issue of the right to a fair trial. The right has affected the distribution of costs in the general court. It can be found in case law from the Supreme Court, where the court deviated from the current cost rules with reference to the right to a fair trial. The Supreme Administrative Court has, in turn, not awarded individual parts compensation for court costs with reference to the right to a fair trial. A legal situation where the set-off rule for administrative court applies without exception, has been criticized. In a legislative context, it has been considered unacceptable and offensive that individuals in some cases may be forced to bear procedural costs, particularly if they have been considered unreasonable. Despite this, the set-off rule is the dominant rule in the Administrative Court.
This thesis has reviewed and clarified the law regarding legal costs in administrative courts. In addition, it has been reviewed whether the compensation model is compatible with the law of damages and the right to a fair trial. It can be concluded that the possibility to receive compensation for legal costs in administrative courts are limited and that criticism can be directed to the underlying reasons for the current regulation. Finally, it can be concluded that the current regulation, to some extent, is compatible with the right to damages, but that it may in some cases conflict with the right to a fair trial.}},
author = {{Sandgrim, Emil}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Kostnadsersättning i förvaltningsprocessen - Om enskildas möjligheter att få ersättning för rättegångskostnader}},
year = {{2021}},
}