Papperslös tydlighet? En analys av hur avskaffandet av aktiebrevet skulle påverka sakrättslig giltighet vid förvärv av brevlösa kupongaktier
(2025) LAGF03 20252Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- I svenska kupongaktiebolag finns en möjlighet, men ingen skyldighet, att utfärda aktiebrev. I de fall aktiebrev har utfärdats stadgas i aktiebolagslagen (2005:551) att tradition av aktiebrevet krävs för en sakrättsligt giltig överlåtelse. Vilka regler som gäller i de fall aktiebrev saknas framgår dock vare sig av lagtexten eller av Högsta domstolens praxis.
Denna uppsats behandlar det sakrättsliga skyddet i förhållande till aktier i så kallade kupongaktiebolag i de fall då aktiebrev inte utfärdats. Den visar på ett osäkert rättsläge, brist på lagstiftning, avsaknad av rättspraxis från Högsta domstolen och en svagt utvecklad doktrin, där merparten av författarna argumenterar för att sakrättsligt skydd i dessa fall ska bedömas i analogi med... (More) - I svenska kupongaktiebolag finns en möjlighet, men ingen skyldighet, att utfärda aktiebrev. I de fall aktiebrev har utfärdats stadgas i aktiebolagslagen (2005:551) att tradition av aktiebrevet krävs för en sakrättsligt giltig överlåtelse. Vilka regler som gäller i de fall aktiebrev saknas framgår dock vare sig av lagtexten eller av Högsta domstolens praxis.
Denna uppsats behandlar det sakrättsliga skyddet i förhållande till aktier i så kallade kupongaktiebolag i de fall då aktiebrev inte utfärdats. Den visar på ett osäkert rättsläge, brist på lagstiftning, avsaknad av rättspraxis från Högsta domstolen och en svagt utvecklad doktrin, där merparten av författarna argumenterar för att sakrättsligt skydd i dessa fall ska bedömas i analogi med 31 § lag (1936:81) om skuldebrev (SkbrL), det vill säga att sak-rättsligt skydd erhålls genom denuntiation.
Aktiebreven har kritiserats för att vara ålderdomliga och kostnadsadministrativt betungande för kupongbolagen. Två separata utredningar har föresla-git att de fysiska aktiebreven bör avskaffas. Uppsatsen argumenterar för ett avskaffande av aktiebrev och för en tydlig kodifiering som innebär att aktier i kupongbolag ska – i sakrättsligt hänseende – betraktas som enkla skuldebrev och att sakrättsligt skydd tydligt ska uppstå vid denuntiation av överlåtelse. (Less) - Abstract
- Coupon companies, a type of limited company, have the option, but are not obliged, to issue share certificates. If a share certificate has been issued, the Swedish Companies Act (2005:551) stipulates that protection in rem is acquired through tradition of the share certificate. However, which rules apply in cases where share certificates have not been issued is not clear either from the legislation or from the case law of the Supreme Court.
This essay deals with the protection in rem in relation to shares in so-called coupon companies in cases where share certificates have not been issued. It shows an uncertain legal situation, a lack of legislation, a lack of case law from the Supreme Court and a weakly developed doctrine, where the... (More) - Coupon companies, a type of limited company, have the option, but are not obliged, to issue share certificates. If a share certificate has been issued, the Swedish Companies Act (2005:551) stipulates that protection in rem is acquired through tradition of the share certificate. However, which rules apply in cases where share certificates have not been issued is not clear either from the legislation or from the case law of the Supreme Court.
This essay deals with the protection in rem in relation to shares in so-called coupon companies in cases where share certificates have not been issued. It shows an uncertain legal situation, a lack of legislation, a lack of case law from the Supreme Court and a weakly developed doctrine, where the majority of the authors argue that protection in rem in these cases should be assessed by analogy with section 31 of the Act on Instrument on Debt (1936:81), i.e. that protection in rem is obtained through denuntiation (notifying the company).
Share certificates have been criticized for being archaic and uneconomical for coupon companies. Two Swedish Government Official Reports have suggested that the physical share certificates should be abolished. This essay argues for an abolition of share certificates and for a clear codification that means that shares in coupon companies should – in terms of property law – be regarded as simple promissory notes and that protection in rem should clearly arise in the denuntiation of a transfer. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9216827
- author
- Holmström, Cornelia LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20252
- year
- 2025
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Associationsrätt, sakrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9216827
- date added to LUP
- 2026-02-09 15:09:19
- date last changed
- 2026-02-09 15:09:19
@misc{9216827,
abstract = {{Coupon companies, a type of limited company, have the option, but are not obliged, to issue share certificates. If a share certificate has been issued, the Swedish Companies Act (2005:551) stipulates that protection in rem is acquired through tradition of the share certificate. However, which rules apply in cases where share certificates have not been issued is not clear either from the legislation or from the case law of the Supreme Court.
This essay deals with the protection in rem in relation to shares in so-called coupon companies in cases where share certificates have not been issued. It shows an uncertain legal situation, a lack of legislation, a lack of case law from the Supreme Court and a weakly developed doctrine, where the majority of the authors argue that protection in rem in these cases should be assessed by analogy with section 31 of the Act on Instrument on Debt (1936:81), i.e. that protection in rem is obtained through denuntiation (notifying the company).
Share certificates have been criticized for being archaic and uneconomical for coupon companies. Two Swedish Government Official Reports have suggested that the physical share certificates should be abolished. This essay argues for an abolition of share certificates and for a clear codification that means that shares in coupon companies should – in terms of property law – be regarded as simple promissory notes and that protection in rem should clearly arise in the denuntiation of a transfer.}},
author = {{Holmström, Cornelia}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Papperslös tydlighet? En analys av hur avskaffandet av aktiebrevet skulle påverka sakrättslig giltighet vid förvärv av brevlösa kupongaktier}},
year = {{2025}},
}