Traditionsprincipens vara eller inte vara i svensk rätt
(2014) LAGF03 20141Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Traditionsprincipen har successivt blivit gällande rätt i Sverige under 1800-talet utan att för den delen vara lagreglerad. Den innebär att en köpare uppnår skydd mot säljarens borgenärer först när köpt lösöre har traderats och kommit ur säljarens besittning. Tidigare var avtalsprincipen rådande i Sverige, den innebär att skyddet mot säljarens borgenärer uppstår direkt i samband med köpeavtalet.
Det var de ekonomiska förhållandena på tidigt 1800-tal som var början till Sveriges övergång till traditionsprincipen. Idag har dock ståndpunkten i Sverige svängt och traditionsprincipen är omdiskuterad i den rättsliga debatten. Under 2013 beslutade regeringen om en utredning i frågan om traditionsprincipens vara eller icke vara. Flertalet... (More) - Traditionsprincipen har successivt blivit gällande rätt i Sverige under 1800-talet utan att för den delen vara lagreglerad. Den innebär att en köpare uppnår skydd mot säljarens borgenärer först när köpt lösöre har traderats och kommit ur säljarens besittning. Tidigare var avtalsprincipen rådande i Sverige, den innebär att skyddet mot säljarens borgenärer uppstår direkt i samband med köpeavtalet.
Det var de ekonomiska förhållandena på tidigt 1800-tal som var början till Sveriges övergång till traditionsprincipen. Idag har dock ståndpunkten i Sverige svängt och traditionsprincipen är omdiskuterad i den rättsliga debatten. Under 2013 beslutade regeringen om en utredning i frågan om traditionsprincipens vara eller icke vara. Flertalet författare har förespråkat en övergång tillbaka till avtalsprincipen, bland annat med hänsyn till att förhållandena i Sverige inte är som de var på 1800-talet och att traditionsprincipen inte är en bra lösning för att hindra borgenärsbedrägerier. Andra hävdar dock att traditionsprincipen ska vara kvar dels på grund av att den visst motverkar skentransaktioner och liknande men även på grund av dess tradition och osäkerheten som skulle infinna sig vid ett byta till avtalsprincipen.
Avtalsprincipen i finsk rätt har jämförts med den svenska traditionsprincipen detta för att ge en större inblick i hur avtalsprincipen används och vilka för- och nackdelar de olika principerna har i sin användning.
Trots att avtalsprincipen har sina fördelar är det tveksamt att dessa är så pass stora att ett byte av princip och gällande rätt ska bli aktuellt eftersom traditionsprincipen också har fördelar och övertaget med att den redan är gällande rätt och beprövad i Sverige. (Less) - Abstract
- The doctrine of traditio has gradually became established law in Sweden during the 19th century even though it has not been laid down in law. The principle means that a buyer of property obtains protection against the seller’s creditors when the possession of the property have been transferred out of the seller’s possession. Prior to the doctrine of traditio, the doctrine of consensus was the law in Sweden. The doctrine of consensus means that the buyer obtains protection against the seller’s creditors directly by the contract.
The reason for Sweden’s change in principle was the economic situation during the early 19th century. But as for today the doctrine of traditio has lost its position as the best principle according to some... (More) - The doctrine of traditio has gradually became established law in Sweden during the 19th century even though it has not been laid down in law. The principle means that a buyer of property obtains protection against the seller’s creditors when the possession of the property have been transferred out of the seller’s possession. Prior to the doctrine of traditio, the doctrine of consensus was the law in Sweden. The doctrine of consensus means that the buyer obtains protection against the seller’s creditors directly by the contract.
The reason for Sweden’s change in principle was the economic situation during the early 19th century. But as for today the doctrine of traditio has lost its position as the best principle according to some writers and it is a disputed subject in the judicial debate. The reason that some wants to change back to the doctrine of consensus is that Sweden is not in the same situation as they were during the 19th century and the doctrine of traditio is not an effective way to prevent deceptive behavior against the seller’s creditors. Other writers however, argues that the doctrine of tradition indeed does prevent this deceptive behavior and also that it is a principle with great tradition which is preferable instead of the insecurity that comes with a shift of applicable law.
The doctrine of consensus in Finnish law has been compared to the Swedish doctrine of traditio. The reason for this is to get a better insight in how the doctrine of consensus is used and what pros and cons the different principles have to offer in their daily usages.
Even though the doctrine of consensus has advantages it is doubtful that these are strong enough that a shift of principle and applicable law will happen. Since the doctrine of tradito also has advantages and the upper hand of already being the established law in Sweden. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4449755
- author
- Jungermann, Andreas LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20141
- year
- 2014
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- sakrätt, traditionsprincipen, avtalsprincipen
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4449755
- date added to LUP
- 2014-06-19 09:43:19
- date last changed
- 2016-01-31 04:15:29
@misc{4449755,
abstract = {{The doctrine of traditio has gradually became established law in Sweden during the 19th century even though it has not been laid down in law. The principle means that a buyer of property obtains protection against the seller’s creditors when the possession of the property have been transferred out of the seller’s possession. Prior to the doctrine of traditio, the doctrine of consensus was the law in Sweden. The doctrine of consensus means that the buyer obtains protection against the seller’s creditors directly by the contract.
The reason for Sweden’s change in principle was the economic situation during the early 19th century. But as for today the doctrine of traditio has lost its position as the best principle according to some writers and it is a disputed subject in the judicial debate. The reason that some wants to change back to the doctrine of consensus is that Sweden is not in the same situation as they were during the 19th century and the doctrine of traditio is not an effective way to prevent deceptive behavior against the seller’s creditors. Other writers however, argues that the doctrine of tradition indeed does prevent this deceptive behavior and also that it is a principle with great tradition which is preferable instead of the insecurity that comes with a shift of applicable law.
The doctrine of consensus in Finnish law has been compared to the Swedish doctrine of traditio. The reason for this is to get a better insight in how the doctrine of consensus is used and what pros and cons the different principles have to offer in their daily usages.
Even though the doctrine of consensus has advantages it is doubtful that these are strong enough that a shift of principle and applicable law will happen. Since the doctrine of tradito also has advantages and the upper hand of already being the established law in Sweden.}},
author = {{Jungermann, Andreas}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Traditionsprincipens vara eller inte vara i svensk rätt}},
year = {{2014}},
}