Advanced

Äktenskapsförord - En avtalsrättslig komparation

Rosengren, David LU (2013) JURM02 20131
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Förevarande text handlar om skillnaderna mellan äktenskapsförord och förmögenhetsrättsliga avtal. Ett äktenskapsförord är ett familjerättsligt avtal med stark förmögenhetsrättslig prägel. Detta till trots gör sig dock en del typiska familjerättsliga särdrag gällande. Sådana särdrag är exempelvis de olika formkrav som gör sig gällande ifråga om äktenskapsförord. Äktenskapsförord skall upptecknas i en skriftlig handling och undertecknas av makarna för giltighet. Äktenskapsförordet skall sedan registreras. Äktenskapsförord är det enda sättet som makar kan avtala om egendomsordningen i sitt äktenskap och frångå det lagfästa giftorättssystemet. Enligt giftorättssystemet har makar antingen enskild egendom eller giftorättsgods, men bara den... (More)
Förevarande text handlar om skillnaderna mellan äktenskapsförord och förmögenhetsrättsliga avtal. Ett äktenskapsförord är ett familjerättsligt avtal med stark förmögenhetsrättslig prägel. Detta till trots gör sig dock en del typiska familjerättsliga särdrag gällande. Sådana särdrag är exempelvis de olika formkrav som gör sig gällande ifråga om äktenskapsförord. Äktenskapsförord skall upptecknas i en skriftlig handling och undertecknas av makarna för giltighet. Äktenskapsförordet skall sedan registreras. Äktenskapsförord är det enda sättet som makar kan avtala om egendomsordningen i sitt äktenskap och frångå det lagfästa giftorättssystemet. Enligt giftorättssystemet har makar antingen enskild egendom eller giftorättsgods, men bara den senare egendomstypen skall ingå i bodelning. Huvudregeln är att all makes egendom är giftorättsgods. Egendom kan dock vara enskild pga. föreskrift av givare, arvlåtare eller testator. Egendom kan även vara enskild pga. äktenskapsförord. Avtalsfriheten ifråga om äktenskapsförord är underkastad olika begränsningar. Det anses exempelvis inte möjligt enligt lag att avtala om villkorade äktenskapsförord. Makar kan inte heller i äktenskapsförord åsidosätta tredje mans föreskrift om att viss egendom skall vara enskild. Om makarna i sitt äktenskapsförord går utöver de i lag uppställda begränsningarna blir förordet ogiltigt. Att äktenskapsförord är en formbunden handling som kräver skriftlig form för giltighet gör att det skriftligt uttryckta får en särskild tyngd vid tolkningen av äktenskapsförord. Parternas vilja är givetvis avgörande vid tolkningen och utgångspunkt därför, men skriftlighetskravet gör att partsavsikten måste kunna knytas till förordstexten för att kunna bli utslagsgivande vid tolkningen. Ett äktenskapsförord utgör inte något moment i den allmänna omsättningens intresse. Härvidlag gör sig inte den sk. tillitsgrundsatsen lika starkt gällande inom det familjerättsliga avtalsparadigmet som inom det förmögenhetsrättsliga. Detta motiverar vissa skillnader i tillämpningen av ogiltighetsreglerna mellan de olika avtalsområdena. Sedan ÄktB:s ikraftträdande har äktenskapsrätten fått en egen jämkningsregel i ÄktB 12 kap. 3 §, vilken utformats med 36 § AvtL som förebild. Vissa omständigheter talar dock för att jämkning av äktenskapsförord oftare borde komma ifråga än jämkning av förmögenhetsrättsliga avtal. Exempel på sådana omständigheter är att avtalet regelmässigt sluts för lång tid och tillämpas först sedan många år gått från avtalstidpunkten samt att äktenskapsförord regelmässigt har benefika inslag.

På det förmögenhetsrättsliga avtalsområdet är avtalsfriheten och avtalsbundenheten grundläggande utgångspunkter. Parterna är härvid i princip fria att avtala med vem som helst om vad som helst utan hänsyn till formkrav och dylikt. Frånvaron av formkrav innebär att avtal kan slutas såväl muntligt som skriftligt och konkludent. Parternas avtal bildar en privat rättskälla dem emellan som styr deras agerande. När parter avtalar med varandra finns en grundläggande tanke om att avtalet skall innebära balans, eller ekvivalens mellan parternas prestationer. Parts befogade tillit anses mer skyddsvärd inom det förmögenhetsrättsliga området vilket gör att förmögenhetsrättsliga avtal präglas mer av den sk. tillitsprincipen än den inom familjerätten härskande viljeprincipen. Trots att avtalsfriheten är en grundläggande princip är den omgärdad av kraftiga begränsningar. I vissa fall finns det exempelvis ett tvång att avtala och i andra fall kan det finnas förbud mot att vissa avtal träffas eller rentav förbud för vissa personer att träffa avtal. Formlöshet är huvudregel ifråga om förmögenhetsrättsliga avtal, men på vissa områden finns alltjämt formkrav. Konsekvenserna av ett brott mot formföreskrift varierar med avtalstypen. I vissa fall blir hela avtalet ogiltigt medan part i andra fall kan kräva att motparten medverkar till att formenligt avtal ingås. Tolkning av förmögenhetsrättsliga avtal sker som huvudregel efter den sk. tillitsteorin med den gemensamma partsviljan som överordnad tolkningsmetod. Eftersom förmögenhetsrättsliga avtal regelmässigt är längre än äktenskapsförord finns fler och mer nyanserade tolkningsmodeller för uttydningen av avtalsinnehållet. Ogiltighetsreglerna är ett exempel på en avvägning mellan tillitsteorin och viljeteorin där tillitsteorin är huvudsaklig utgångspunkt. För att ogiltighetsreglerna i AvtL skall vara tillämpliga krävs kausalitet mellan otillbörligheten och avtalets ingående. Jämkningsmöjligheterna i AvtL är exempel på undantag från den förmögenhetsrättsliga utgångspunkten att avtal skall hållas. 36 § AvtL har ett explicit syfte att utgöra skydd för svagare part. Jämkning är ett mer nyanserat sätt att ingripa mot obillighet i avtalsförhållanden än att förklara avtalet ogiltigt. Oskälighetsbedömningen samverkar med AvtL:s övriga ogiltighetsgrunder såtillvida att om ett avtal inte kan förklaras ogiltigt msa. t.ex. svekregeln i AvtL 30 § så kan omständigheterna som inte ansågs utgöra svek ändock påverka resultatet av en skälighetsbedömning. (Less)
Abstract
This text is about the various differences between prenuptial agreements and contracts dealing with property law. A prenuptial agreement is a contract between partners, with strong economical characteristics. In spite of these characteristics there are some essential differences between the two types of contracts. There are, for instance, more formal requirements to take into consideration concerning prenuptial agreements. Prenuptial agreements, according to Swedish law, are invalid unless in written form and signed by the parties thereto. The agreement shall then be subject to registration. A prenuptial agreement is the only means by which the husband and wife may deviate from the legal marital system. According to the legal marital... (More)
This text is about the various differences between prenuptial agreements and contracts dealing with property law. A prenuptial agreement is a contract between partners, with strong economical characteristics. In spite of these characteristics there are some essential differences between the two types of contracts. There are, for instance, more formal requirements to take into consideration concerning prenuptial agreements. Prenuptial agreements, according to Swedish law, are invalid unless in written form and signed by the parties thereto. The agreement shall then be subject to registration. A prenuptial agreement is the only means by which the husband and wife may deviate from the legal marital system. According to the legal marital system there are only two forms of property in any marriage; marital property and separate property. Only marital property is to be subject to partition at the event of the dissolution of the marriage in question. The main rule is that all the partners’ property is marital property. Property can also be separate due to a provision in a will or a provision stipulated by a donor. Property can also be separate due to a provision in a prenuptial agreement. The principle of freedom of contract is subject to a number of limitations when it comes to prenuptial agreements. It is prohibited to make the prenuptial agreement subject to certain conditions. Partners are also unable to revoke a third party provision stipulating that certain property is separate. If the partners exceed the legal bounds for prenuptial agreements the contract will be voided in consequence. The fact that prenuptial agreements are required to be in writing lends weight to that which is written when it comes to interpreting the contract. The will of the parties determines the interpretation of the contract, but the will of the parties must be linked to the text in the agreement. A prenuptial agreement is not part of the public circulation of goods or otherwise, which entails that the good faith of a party to a contract is less important than it would have been had the contract been of more economical characteristics. This fact is used to motivate certain differences in how the rules of invalidation of contracts are applied. The law of marriage has its own adjustment rule in ÄktB 12 kap. 3 §, which was made in the image of its predecessor the 36 § of AvtL. Certain factors indicate that adjustment might be a more frequent occurrence when dealing with prenuptial agreements than it is when dealing with contracts of property law. For instance that the prenuptial agreement is entered into long before it is supposed to be put into practice and that the agreement usually contains elements of a non-onerous nature.

In the paradigm of property law the freedom of contract and the contractuality of contracts, pacta sunt servanda, are the main rules. The parties to a contract are free to enter into contracts with whomever they desire, regarding whatever they desire unconcerned with formal requirements. The absence of formal requirements makes contracts valid regardless of how they are entered into. The contract of the parties becomes a private source of law that governs the actions of the parties. There is a basic principle of equivalency in contracts. The good faith of a contractual party is considered more important in the area of property law than in the area of family law where the will of the party is paramount. Although the freedom of contracts is a basic principle of property law it is subject to a number of limitations. In certain cases there might be a requirement to enter into contracts or there might be a prohibition to enter into contracts. The absence of formal requirements is a main rule in the area of property law, but in certain cases there are different formal requirements. The consequence of a breach of a formal requirement varies. In certain cases the entire contract is voided, whereas in other cases a party to a contract can require that the other party contributes to meeting the formal requirements. Interpretation of property contracts is done from the perspective of the good faith of a party where the will of the parties is super ordinate. Due to the fact that property contracts are usually more extensive than prenuptial agreements there are more interpretation models for interpreting the contractual contents. The rules of invalidation of contracts are examples of a balance between the opposing theories of good faith and the will of a party, where the good faith of a party is the basis for considerations. For the rules of invalidation of contracts to be applicable to a certain contract, there is an absolute requirement of causality between the inappropriate act and the decision to enter into the contract. The adjustment possibilities in the law of contracts are examples of exceptions from the main rule of pacta sunt servanda. The 36 § AvtL has the explicit purpose to protect a weaker party. Adjustment is a more nuanced means by which inappropriateness in a contractual situation may be rectified than declaring the contract invalid. The assessment of whether a contract is fair or not, in the sense of 36 § AvtL, is done in unison with the rules of invalidity of contracts. If a party has been fraudulent in entering into a contract, the inappropriateness herein can influence whether or not a contract is ultimately to be considered fair. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Rosengren, David LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Prenuptial agreements - A comparison with property law
course
JURM02 20131
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Familjerätt, avtal, äktenskapsförord
language
Swedish
id
3801877
date added to LUP
2013-06-14 12:48:37
date last changed
2013-06-14 12:48:37
@misc{3801877,
  abstract     = {This text is about the various differences between prenuptial agreements and contracts dealing with property law. A prenuptial agreement is a contract between partners, with strong economical characteristics. In spite of these characteristics there are some essential differences between the two types of contracts. There are, for instance, more formal requirements to take into consideration concerning prenuptial agreements. Prenuptial agreements, according to Swedish law, are invalid unless in written form and signed by the parties thereto. The agreement shall then be subject to registration. A prenuptial agreement is the only means by which the husband and wife may deviate from the legal marital system. According to the legal marital system there are only two forms of property in any marriage; marital property and separate property. Only marital property is to be subject to partition at the event of the dissolution of the marriage in question. The main rule is that all the partners’ property is marital property. Property can also be separate due to a provision in a will or a provision stipulated by a donor. Property can also be separate due to a provision in a prenuptial agreement. The principle of freedom of contract is subject to a number of limitations when it comes to prenuptial agreements. It is prohibited to make the prenuptial agreement subject to certain conditions. Partners are also unable to revoke a third party provision stipulating that certain property is separate. If the partners exceed the legal bounds for prenuptial agreements the contract will be voided in consequence. The fact that prenuptial agreements are required to be in writing lends weight to that which is written when it comes to interpreting the contract. The will of the parties determines the interpretation of the contract, but the will of the parties must be linked to the text in the agreement. A prenuptial agreement is not part of the public circulation of goods or otherwise, which entails that the good faith of a party to a contract is less important than it would have been had the contract been of more economical characteristics. This fact is used to motivate certain differences in how the rules of invalidation of contracts are applied. The law of marriage has its own adjustment rule in ÄktB 12 kap. 3 §, which was made in the image of its predecessor the 36 § of AvtL. Certain factors indicate that adjustment might be a more frequent occurrence when dealing with prenuptial agreements than it is when dealing with contracts of property law. For instance that the prenuptial agreement is entered into long before it is supposed to be put into practice and that the agreement usually contains elements of a non-onerous nature. 

In the paradigm of property law the freedom of contract and the contractuality of contracts, pacta sunt servanda, are the main rules. The parties to a contract are free to enter into contracts with whomever they desire, regarding whatever they desire unconcerned with formal requirements. The absence of formal requirements makes contracts valid regardless of how they are entered into. The contract of the parties becomes a private source of law that governs the actions of the parties. There is a basic principle of equivalency in contracts. The good faith of a contractual party is considered more important in the area of property law than in the area of family law where the will of the party is paramount. Although the freedom of contracts is a basic principle of property law it is subject to a number of limitations. In certain cases there might be a requirement to enter into contracts or there might be a prohibition to enter into contracts. The absence of formal requirements is a main rule in the area of property law, but in certain cases there are different formal requirements. The consequence of a breach of a formal requirement varies. In certain cases the entire contract is voided, whereas in other cases a party to a contract can require that the other party contributes to meeting the formal requirements. Interpretation of property contracts is done from the perspective of the good faith of a party where the will of the parties is super ordinate. Due to the fact that property contracts are usually more extensive than prenuptial agreements there are more interpretation models for interpreting the contractual contents. The rules of invalidation of contracts are examples of a balance between the opposing theories of good faith and the will of a party, where the good faith of a party is the basis for considerations. For the rules of invalidation of contracts to be applicable to a certain contract, there is an absolute requirement of causality between the inappropriate act and the decision to enter into the contract. The adjustment possibilities in the law of contracts are examples of exceptions from the main rule of pacta sunt servanda. The 36 § AvtL has the explicit purpose to protect a weaker party. Adjustment is a more nuanced means by which inappropriateness in a contractual situation may be rectified than declaring the contract invalid. The assessment of whether a contract is fair or not, in the sense of 36 § AvtL, is done in unison with the rules of invalidity of contracts. If a party has been fraudulent in entering into a contract, the inappropriateness herein can influence whether or not a contract is ultimately to be considered fair.},
  author       = {Rosengren, David},
  keyword      = {Familjerätt,avtal,äktenskapsförord},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Äktenskapsförord - En avtalsrättslig komparation},
  year         = {2013},
}