Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Gemensam bostad ur ett företagsperspektiv

Eriksson, Anna LU (2013) HARH10 20131
Department of Business Law
Abstract (Swedish)
De flesta makar och sambor bor tillsammans i en fastighet eller i en lägenhet som de vanligtvis betraktar som deras gemensamma bostad. Inte ovanligt är att fastigheten utgör en lantbruksfastighet eller att någon av parterna bedriver näringsverksamhet i bostaden. För makar och sambor finns i äktenskapsbalken respektive sambolagen ett par skydds¬regler som kan bli tillämpliga vid en separation mellan parterna. Övertaganderätten är en av dessa regler och innebär att den part som bäst behöver den gemensamma bostaden äger rätt att överta densamma vid en separation. I de fall då det är den andra parten som bedriver näringsverksamheten kan problem uppstå. Eftersom reglerna enbart blir tillämp¬liga på den gemensamma bostaden är det viktigt att... (More)
De flesta makar och sambor bor tillsammans i en fastighet eller i en lägenhet som de vanligtvis betraktar som deras gemensamma bostad. Inte ovanligt är att fastigheten utgör en lantbruksfastighet eller att någon av parterna bedriver näringsverksamhet i bostaden. För makar och sambor finns i äktenskapsbalken respektive sambolagen ett par skydds¬regler som kan bli tillämpliga vid en separation mellan parterna. Övertaganderätten är en av dessa regler och innebär att den part som bäst behöver den gemensamma bostaden äger rätt att överta densamma vid en separation. I de fall då det är den andra parten som bedriver näringsverksamheten kan problem uppstå. Eftersom reglerna enbart blir tillämp¬liga på den gemensamma bostaden är det viktigt att definiera vad begreppet ”gemensam bostad” innebär, vilket jag ämnar göra i denna uppsats. Studien kommer genomföras ur ett företagsperspektiv då jag avser att utreda huruvida en fastighet eller lägenhet som utöver bostaden även inrymmer en näringsverksamhet kan utgöra gemensam bostad och därmed omfattas av skyddsreglerna. För sambor är det även viktigt att definiera begreppet gemensam bostad eftersom bodelningsreglerna enbart blir tillämpliga i de fall då bostaden är anskaffad för gemensamt bruk och utgör gemensam bostad.

För att en bostad skall anses utgöra parternas gemensamma skall den vara avsedd som deras gemensamma hem samt att egendomen huvudsakligen skall innehas för detta ändamål. Tjänar bostaden flera ändamål måste bostadsändamålet således vara det huvud¬sakliga. Genom min studie kan jag konstatera att det i förarbetena saknas en grundlig beskrivning av vad som menas med huvudsakligen. Dock kan utifrån befintlig praxis konstateras att större jordbruksfastigheter om ca 160 ha inte huvudsakligen kan anses utgöra gemensam bostad. Likaså anses inte fastigheter om ca 35 ha utgöra gemensam bostad men däremot har domstolen i ett fall ansett att en fastighet om 5 ha utgör gemen¬sam bostad. En lägenhet har inte ansetts utgöra gemensam bostad när näringsverksam¬heten utgjorde 32 kvm av lägenhetens totala 78 kvm.

Domstolen har under vissa omständigheter ansett att fastigheter och lägenheter, varinom näring bedrivs, kan utgöra gemensam bostad, vilket innebär att de även omfattas av äkt¬enskapsbalkens och sambolagens skyddsregler. Utgör fastigheten eller lägenheten gemen¬sam bostad ingår den i en bodelning mellan sambor, dock under förutsättning att den dessutom har anskaffats för gemensamt bruk. I brist på tydliga regler kommer det dock att vara upp till domstolen att bedöma huruvida en fastighet eller lägenhet som tjänar flera ändamål utgör gemensam bostad. (Less)
Abstract
The majority of married couples and co-habitants live together in rented or owned accommodation which they usually consider to be their joint property. It is not unusual that the property is an agricultural property or that one half of the couple use the property for business purposes. There are protective provisions in The Marriage Code and also in The Cohabitees Act which are relevant in case of separation and divorce. One of these provisions is the right of transfer of the ownership of a property or transfer of a tenancy. According to this provision, the title of a property or tenancy should be transferred to the party in greatest need of the same. There can however be difficulties with this provision when the party who is not... (More)
The majority of married couples and co-habitants live together in rented or owned accommodation which they usually consider to be their joint property. It is not unusual that the property is an agricultural property or that one half of the couple use the property for business purposes. There are protective provisions in The Marriage Code and also in The Cohabitees Act which are relevant in case of separation and divorce. One of these provisions is the right of transfer of the ownership of a property or transfer of a tenancy. According to this provision, the title of a property or tenancy should be transferred to the party in greatest need of the same. There can however be difficulties with this provision when the party who is not considered to have the greatest need is also the party using the property for business purposes. The protective provisions are only applicable to a prop¬erty in which both parties are living together as a couple. Therefore, it is important to accurately define what “a property in which both parties living together as a couple” actually means, which is what I will do in this thesis. I will use a business perspective as I intend to establish whether a rented or owned property which is used partly for accom¬modation purposes and partly for business purposes can be a property in which the parties are living together as a couple to which the protective provisions are applicable.

For a property to be considered to be used as joint accommodation it must be intended to be used as the couples’ joint home and must also have been purchased or rented for that purpose. If the property is used for more than one purpose, the property must be used mainly for accommodation purposes. I have come to the conclusion that there is no proper definition of “mainly” in the commentary to the legislation. Help can however be derived from relevant case law. Larger agricultural properties (i.e. about 160 ha) are not usually considered to constitute joint accommodation. This is also the case with agricul¬tural properties of about 35 ha. On the other hand, the Courts have on one occasion con¬sidered that a property of about 5 ha could constitute joint accommodation. A flat was not considered to constitute joint accommodation when about 100 square feet of its total area of about 240 square feet was being used for business purposes.

The Courts have considered that in some circumstances properties which are being used for business purposes can also constitute joint accommodation, which means that the protective provisions are applicable. The rules are not clear cut which means it will be up to the Courts to decide in any given case whether a property which is being used for more than one purpose constitutes joint accommodation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Eriksson, Anna LU
supervisor
organization
course
HARH10 20131
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Gemensam bostad, civilrätt, familjerätt, bodelningsregler
language
Swedish
id
3625889
date added to LUP
2013-03-25 15:55:06
date last changed
2013-03-25 15:55:06
@misc{3625889,
  abstract     = {The majority of married couples and co-habitants live together in rented or owned accommodation which they usually consider to be their joint property. It is not unusual that the property is an agricultural property or that one half of the couple use the property for business purposes. There are protective provisions in The Marriage Code and also in The Cohabitees Act which are relevant in case of separation and divorce. One of these provisions is the right of transfer of the ownership of a property or transfer of a tenancy. According to this provision, the title of a property or tenancy should be transferred to the party in greatest need of the same. There can however be difficulties with this provision when the party who is not considered to have the greatest need is also the party using the property for business purposes. The protective provisions are only applicable to a prop¬erty in which both parties are living together as a couple. Therefore, it is important to accurately define what “a property in which both parties living together as a couple” actually means, which is what I will do in this thesis. I will use a business perspective as I intend to establish whether a rented or owned property which is used partly for accom¬modation purposes and partly for business purposes can be a property in which the parties are living together as a couple to which the protective provisions are applicable. 

For a property to be considered to be used as joint accommodation it must be intended to be used as the couples’ joint home and must also have been purchased or rented for that purpose. If the property is used for more than one purpose, the property must be used mainly for accommodation purposes. I have come to the conclusion that there is no proper definition of “mainly” in the commentary to the legislation. Help can however be derived from relevant case law. Larger agricultural properties (i.e. about 160 ha) are not usually considered to constitute joint accommodation. This is also the case with agricul¬tural properties of about 35 ha. On the other hand, the Courts have on one occasion con¬sidered that a property of about 5 ha could constitute joint accommodation. A flat was not considered to constitute joint accommodation when about 100 square feet of its total area of about 240 square feet was being used for business purposes.

The Courts have considered that in some circumstances properties which are being used for business purposes can also constitute joint accommodation, which means that the protective provisions are applicable. The rules are not clear cut which means it will be up to the Courts to decide in any given case whether a property which is being used for more than one purpose constitutes joint accommodation.},
  author       = {Eriksson, Anna},
  keyword      = {Gemensam bostad,civilrätt,familjerätt,bodelningsregler},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Gemensam bostad ur ett företagsperspektiv},
  year         = {2013},
}