Advanced

Boilerplate ur ett processrättsligt perspektiv - särskilt om integrationsklausulens effekter på bevisprövningen

Herrström, Philip LU (2012) JURM02 20121
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Boilerplate är en term som används för att beskriva standardiserade klausuler som ofta återfinns i slutet av ett avtal och som behandlar generella frågor som inte är beroende av avtalets art eller omfattning. Det finns flertalet olika boilerplate, varav en är integrationsklausulen. Klausulen har i och med internationaliseringen av den kommersiella rätten blivit mycket vanligt förekommande i svenska avtal. Den syftar till att eliminera, eller i vart fall reducera, betydelsen av s.k. avtalspreliminärer. När parterna ska ingå ett större kommersiellt avtal har det ofta föregåtts av förhandlingar varvid avtalsutkast och dylikt har cirkulerat. Om parterna eliminerar samtliga omständigheter som föregått avtalsslutet erhåller de ett visst mått av... (More)
Boilerplate är en term som används för att beskriva standardiserade klausuler som ofta återfinns i slutet av ett avtal och som behandlar generella frågor som inte är beroende av avtalets art eller omfattning. Det finns flertalet olika boilerplate, varav en är integrationsklausulen. Klausulen har i och med internationaliseringen av den kommersiella rätten blivit mycket vanligt förekommande i svenska avtal. Den syftar till att eliminera, eller i vart fall reducera, betydelsen av s.k. avtalspreliminärer. När parterna ska ingå ett större kommersiellt avtal har det ofta föregåtts av förhandlingar varvid avtalsutkast och dylikt har cirkulerat. Om parterna eliminerar samtliga omständigheter som föregått avtalsslutet erhåller de ett visst mått av förutsebarhet och en god överblick av deras rättsliga mellanhavande.

I de angloamerikanska rättsordningarna är integrationsklausulen accessorisk med en bakomliggande regel, den s.k. the parol evidence rule. Regelns funktion är i princip densamma som en integrationsklausuls. Klausulen inkorporeras för att bekräfta parternas intentioner att tillämpa regeln. Regeln utesluter i sin tur samtliga avtalspreliminärer från parternas rättsliga mellanhavanden. De får därmed inte föra bevisning om omständigheter före avtalsslutet för att motsäga, komplettera eller ändra det skriftliga, integrerade avtalet. Svensk rätt har ingen motsvarighet till the parol evidence rule. Tvärtom finns det i svensk rätt bestämmelser som talar emot en tillämpning av integrationsklausuler. I Sverige tillämpas bl.a. principen om fri bevisföring varför parterna är tillåtna att föra den bevisning de anser erforderlig. Därtill gäller principen om processuella överenskommelsers ogiltighet utan stöd i lag. En klausul som avser att begränsa parternas möjligheter att föra bevisning kan därför inte erhålla sin sanna rättsliga verkan i ett förfarande vid allmän domstol. Trots detta återfinns integrationsklausulen i de flesta kommersiella avtal.

Skiljeförfarandet är oftast den naturliga judiciella tvistelösningsordningen när större kommersiella parter inte kan komma överens. Anledningen sägs ofta vara skiljeförfarandets flexibla natur vari parterna kan styra förfarandet i stor utsträckning. Ur denna aspekt är det av stort intresse att undersöka huruvida en integrationsklausul kan erhålla någon verkan beträffande bevisningen i ett skiljeförfarande. Med andra ord, kan parterna begränsa bevisföringen i ett skiljeförfarande med hjälp av en integrationsklausul? Frågan är inte lättbesvarad. Bland annat innebär integrationsklausulens tillämpning en kollision mellan grundläggande processrättsliga principer, däribland principen om partsautonomi och kravet på ett rättssäkert förfarande. I doktrin har det diskuteras hur man gör en bedömning av gränsen för när partsautonomin får ge vika för rättssäkerheten. Den generella slutsats som har dragits är att en integrationsklausul bör innebära en begränsning av bevisföringen i ett skiljeförfarande. Det krävs dock att skiljenämnden beaktar de rättsskydd som följer av LSF och EKMR och noga överväger innan de agerar ex officio. (Less)
Abstract
Boilerplate is a term used to describe standardized clauses that often appear at the end of a contract and deals with general issues that are not dependent on the nature or scope of the agreement. There are several different boilerplates, one of which is the entire agreement clause. The entire agreement clause has become very common in Swedish law due to the internationalization of Swedish business law. An entire agreement clause typically states that the written contract contains the entire agreement between the parties, and supersedes all oral or written agreements, representations, understandings etc. When the parties have entered a major commercial agreement it has often been preceded by negotiations which have generated drafts,... (More)
Boilerplate is a term used to describe standardized clauses that often appear at the end of a contract and deals with general issues that are not dependent on the nature or scope of the agreement. There are several different boilerplates, one of which is the entire agreement clause. The entire agreement clause has become very common in Swedish law due to the internationalization of Swedish business law. An entire agreement clause typically states that the written contract contains the entire agreement between the parties, and supersedes all oral or written agreements, representations, understandings etc. When the parties have entered a major commercial agreement it has often been preceded by negotiations which have generated drafts, letters of intent and such. If the parties eliminate all the circumstances that preceded the conclusion of the contract they will achieve some contractual certainty and thus a good overview of their commercial relationship.

In the Anglo-American legal systems the entire agreement clause is ancillary to an underlying rule, the parol evidence rule. The function of the parol evidence rule is to provide the entire agreement clause its legal effect. An entire agreement clause acknowledges the intent of the parties that the written contract is completely integrated. Such an intention is necessary in order for the parol evidence rule to be applicable to its full extent. The parties may thus not adduce extrinsic evidence to contradict, add or modify the written integrated contract. There exists no rule that corresponds to the parol evidence rule in Swedish law. On the contrary, there is in Swedish law provisions that contradict an application of the entire agreement clause. Two fundamental principles of Swedish procedural law are that the parties are allowed to bring any evidence they deem necessary into court and procedural clauses are not binding. Therefore, an entire agreement clause, which is designed to limit the ability of the parties to adduce evidence, cannot obtain its true legal effect in a court proceeding. Despite this, the entire agreement clause exists in almost every major commercial contract.

As mentioned above, the entire agreement clauses are often found in large commercial contracts. As is well known, the arbitration proceeding is the natural judicial dispute resolution scheme when commercial parties cannot agree. The reason is often said to be the flexible nature of arbitration in which the parties themselves can control the procedure to a large extent. From this aspect, it is of great interest to investigate whether an entire agreement clause could obtain any effect regarding the question of admissibility of evidence in arbitration. In other words, can the parties limit the evidence in the arbitration by incorporate an entire agreement clause into their contract? The question is not easily answered for several reasons.

Among other things, the entire agreement clauses’ enforcement causes a clash between two fundamental principles of Swedish procedural law - the principle of party autonomy and the procedural rights. The doctrine has pointed out several factors that they consider being crucial in assessing whether the principle of party autonomy will give way to the procedural rights. The general conclusions reached in this thesis are that an entire agreement clause should imply a limitation of the evidence in arbitration. Though, it is required that the arbitrators consider very carefully before acting ex officio. The arbitrators should not decide that certain evidence is inadmissible in the absence of an objection from one of the parties. The arbitrators should in each case consider whether the procedural rights, conferred by LSF and the ECHR, are compromised. The question addressed in this thesis is therefore which legal effect an entire agreement clause has when it is used in contracts that are governed by Swedish law and subject to the fundamental principles of Swedish procedural law. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Herrström, Philip LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Boilerplate from a procedural perspective - in particular about the entire agreement clause affects on the admissibility of evidence
course
JURM02 20121
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
avtalsrätt, civilrätt, private law, procedural law, processrätt, skiljemannarätt, arbitration, skiljeförfarande, boilerplate, integrationsklausul, integrationsklausuler, bevisprövning, bevisföring, bevisvärdering, bevis
language
Swedish
id
2797150
date added to LUP
2012-07-13 16:09:29
date last changed
2012-07-13 16:09:29
@misc{2797150,
  abstract     = {Boilerplate is a term used to describe standardized clauses that often appear at the end of a contract and deals with general issues that are not dependent on the nature or scope of the agreement. There are several different boilerplates, one of which is the entire agreement clause. The entire agreement clause has become very common in Swedish law due to the internationalization of Swedish business law. An entire agreement clause typically states that the written contract contains the entire agreement between the parties, and supersedes all oral or written agreements, representations, understandings etc. When the parties have entered a major commercial agreement it has often been preceded by negotiations which have generated drafts, letters of intent and such. If the parties eliminate all the circumstances that preceded the conclusion of the contract they will achieve some contractual certainty and thus a good overview of their commercial relationship.

In the Anglo-American legal systems the entire agreement clause is ancillary to an underlying rule, the parol evidence rule. The function of the parol evidence rule is to provide the entire agreement clause its legal effect. An entire agreement clause acknowledges the intent of the parties that the written contract is completely integrated. Such an intention is necessary in order for the parol evidence rule to be applicable to its full extent. The parties may thus not adduce extrinsic evidence to contradict, add or modify the written integrated contract. There exists no rule that corresponds to the parol evidence rule in Swedish law. On the contrary, there is in Swedish law provisions that contradict an application of the entire agreement clause. Two fundamental principles of Swedish procedural law are that the parties are allowed to bring any evidence they deem necessary into court and procedural clauses are not binding. Therefore, an entire agreement clause, which is designed to limit the ability of the parties to adduce evidence, cannot obtain its true legal effect in a court proceeding. Despite this, the entire agreement clause exists in almost every major commercial contract.

As mentioned above, the entire agreement clauses are often found in large commercial contracts. As is well known, the arbitration proceeding is the natural judicial dispute resolution scheme when commercial parties cannot agree. The reason is often said to be the flexible nature of arbitration in which the parties themselves can control the procedure to a large extent. From this aspect, it is of great interest to investigate whether an entire agreement clause could obtain any effect regarding the question of admissibility of evidence in arbitration. In other words, can the parties limit the evidence in the arbitration by incorporate an entire agreement clause into their contract? The question is not easily answered for several reasons.

Among other things, the entire agreement clauses’ enforcement causes a clash between two fundamental principles of Swedish procedural law - the principle of party autonomy and the procedural rights. The doctrine has pointed out several factors that they consider being crucial in assessing whether the principle of party autonomy will give way to the procedural rights. The general conclusions reached in this thesis are that an entire agreement clause should imply a limitation of the evidence in arbitration. Though, it is required that the arbitrators consider very carefully before acting ex officio. The arbitrators should not decide that certain evidence is inadmissible in the absence of an objection from one of the parties. The arbitrators should in each case consider whether the procedural rights, conferred by LSF and the ECHR, are compromised. The question addressed in this thesis is therefore which legal effect an entire agreement clause has when it is used in contracts that are governed by Swedish law and subject to the fundamental principles of Swedish procedural law.},
  author       = {Herrström, Philip},
  keyword      = {avtalsrätt,civilrätt,private law,procedural law,processrätt,skiljemannarätt,arbitration,skiljeförfarande,boilerplate,integrationsklausul,integrationsklausuler,bevisprövning,bevisföring,bevisvärdering,bevis},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Boilerplate ur ett processrättsligt perspektiv - särskilt om integrationsklausulens effekter på bevisprövningen},
  year         = {2012},
}