Allmänna Bestämmelser - ett avtalsrättsligt fuskbygge? Om Högsta domstolens tolkning av entreprenadavtalet
(2016) LAGM01 20161Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Framställningen syftar till att undersöka hur HD:s tolkning av kommersiella entreprenadavtal utvecklats. För att uppnå syftet utreds hur entreprenadavtal ska tolkas, hur praxis har utvecklats på området sedan år 2000 samt vilka konsekvenser utvecklingen kan medföra.
Entreprenadavtal är inte lagreglerade i svensk rätt och sparsamt behandlade i doktrin. Termen kan förstås som ett avtal där entreprenören åtar sig att utföra avtalade bygg- och anläggningsarbeten för beställarens räkning. Eftersom lagstiftning saknas på området är bruket av standardavtalet AB 04 dominerande. Avtalet är främst avsett att användas för utförandeentreprenader, där beställaren utför projekteringen och entreprenören utför arbetet. AB 04 är ett resultat av... (More) - Framställningen syftar till att undersöka hur HD:s tolkning av kommersiella entreprenadavtal utvecklats. För att uppnå syftet utreds hur entreprenadavtal ska tolkas, hur praxis har utvecklats på området sedan år 2000 samt vilka konsekvenser utvecklingen kan medföra.
Entreprenadavtal är inte lagreglerade i svensk rätt och sparsamt behandlade i doktrin. Termen kan förstås som ett avtal där entreprenören åtar sig att utföra avtalade bygg- och anläggningsarbeten för beställarens räkning. Eftersom lagstiftning saknas på området är bruket av standardavtalet AB 04 dominerande. Avtalet är främst avsett att användas för utförandeentreprenader, där beställaren utför projekteringen och entreprenören utför arbetet. AB 04 är ett resultat av kompromisser mellan företrädare för såväl beställarsidan som entreprenörsidan, vilket medfört att bestämmelserna i vissa fall är oklara. När innehållet av ett avtalsvillkor är tvistigt behöver det tolkas. De principer som används vid tolkning är inte reglerade i lag, de har istället vuxit fram genom praxis. Grunden för avtalstolkning är den gemensamma partsavsikten. Vid tolkning beaktas även det objektiva innehåll avtalet får anses ha. Domstolarna kan även använda sig av en friare tolkning där bland annat dispositiv rätt särskilt beaktas. Entreprenadavtalets förhållande till den dispositiva rätten, särskilt köprätten, är inte alldeles oproblematisk. Enligt 2 § köplagen är uppförande av byggnad undantaget lagens tillämpningsområde, emellertid anses lagen ge uttryck för allmänna obligationsrättsliga principer. På grund av detta har köplagen tagits i anspråk i entreprenadrättsliga sammanhang.
Framställningen finner att Högsta domstolen på senare tid tydligt redogjort för en metodologisk tolkningsmetod där dispositiv rätt, framförallt köprätt, har fått en framstående betydelse vid tolkningen. Detta är en påtaglig utveckling från tidigare avgöranden. Förr beaktas syftet och entreprenadavtalets särdrag i större utsträckning. Högsta domstolens nya tolkningsmetod anses äventyra bestämmelsernas ursprungliga syfte, vilket är en följd av avtalets vaga utformning. Till följd av den nya tolkningsmetoden anses dessutom tidigare prejudikat fått en oklar ställning. (Less) - Abstract
- The purpose of the thesis is to examine how the interpretation of construction contracts has evolved by the Supreme Court. The thesis examines how the contracts should be interpreted, how the precedents have developed in the field since year 2000 and what consequences the development could bring.
Construction contracts are not regulated by Swedish law and are rarely treated in the doctrine. A construction contract is an agreement in which the contractor undertakes to perform agreed work for the client. Since there is no legislation in this area, the use of a standard contract named AB 04 is dominant on the Swedish market. The agreement is primarily intended to be used on contracts where the employer carries out the projection and the... (More) - The purpose of the thesis is to examine how the interpretation of construction contracts has evolved by the Supreme Court. The thesis examines how the contracts should be interpreted, how the precedents have developed in the field since year 2000 and what consequences the development could bring.
Construction contracts are not regulated by Swedish law and are rarely treated in the doctrine. A construction contract is an agreement in which the contractor undertakes to perform agreed work for the client. Since there is no legislation in this area, the use of a standard contract named AB 04 is dominant on the Swedish market. The agreement is primarily intended to be used on contracts where the employer carries out the projection and the contractor performs the work. AB 04 is a result of compromises between representatives from both the employer and contractor side, which has resulted in that the contractual terms and conditions in some cases are imprecise. In general, contractual terms and conditions need to be interpreted when they are unclear. There is no law regulating the interpretation of contracts, so the principles have emerged through precedents. The foundation of contractual interpretation is the intention of the parties. The interpretation also includes observing the objective content the agreement may be considered to have. The court may also use a more liberal interpretation that includes optional provisions being given particular consideration. The construction contracts’ relation to optional law, particularly the Sale of Goods Act, is not entirely unproblematic. The section 2 of the Sale of Goods Act states that the construction of buildings are excluded from the scope of the Act, however, the law is considered to express general contract law principles. Because of this, the Sale of Goods Act is used in the construction legal context.
The study shows that the Supreme Court recently set out a methodological interpretation method where the optional provisions, especially the Sale of Goods Act, has been given a prominent role for the interpretation. This is a noticeable change from previous rulings. Formerly, the purpose and the peculiar nature of the construction contract were considered to a greater extent. The Supreme Court's new interpretation method is also found to endanger the agreement’s original purpose, which is a result of the agreement's vague expression. Furthermore, due to the new interpretational method it is considered that the older precedents now have obtained an uncertain status. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8863691
- author
- Pusic, Adriana LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- General Conditions - a contractual jerry-building? About the Supreme Court's interpretation of the contract agreement
- course
- LAGM01 20161
- year
- 2016
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- avtalsrätt, entreprenadrätt, standardavtal, AB 04, avtalstolkning
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8863691
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-05 14:26:06
- date last changed
- 2016-04-05 14:26:06
@misc{8863691,
abstract = {{The purpose of the thesis is to examine how the interpretation of construction contracts has evolved by the Supreme Court. The thesis examines how the contracts should be interpreted, how the precedents have developed in the field since year 2000 and what consequences the development could bring.
Construction contracts are not regulated by Swedish law and are rarely treated in the doctrine. A construction contract is an agreement in which the contractor undertakes to perform agreed work for the client. Since there is no legislation in this area, the use of a standard contract named AB 04 is dominant on the Swedish market. The agreement is primarily intended to be used on contracts where the employer carries out the projection and the contractor performs the work. AB 04 is a result of compromises between representatives from both the employer and contractor side, which has resulted in that the contractual terms and conditions in some cases are imprecise. In general, contractual terms and conditions need to be interpreted when they are unclear. There is no law regulating the interpretation of contracts, so the principles have emerged through precedents. The foundation of contractual interpretation is the intention of the parties. The interpretation also includes observing the objective content the agreement may be considered to have. The court may also use a more liberal interpretation that includes optional provisions being given particular consideration. The construction contracts’ relation to optional law, particularly the Sale of Goods Act, is not entirely unproblematic. The section 2 of the Sale of Goods Act states that the construction of buildings are excluded from the scope of the Act, however, the law is considered to express general contract law principles. Because of this, the Sale of Goods Act is used in the construction legal context.
The study shows that the Supreme Court recently set out a methodological interpretation method where the optional provisions, especially the Sale of Goods Act, has been given a prominent role for the interpretation. This is a noticeable change from previous rulings. Formerly, the purpose and the peculiar nature of the construction contract were considered to a greater extent. The Supreme Court's new interpretation method is also found to endanger the agreement’s original purpose, which is a result of the agreement's vague expression. Furthermore, due to the new interpretational method it is considered that the older precedents now have obtained an uncertain status.}},
author = {{Pusic, Adriana}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Allmänna Bestämmelser - ett avtalsrättsligt fuskbygge? Om Högsta domstolens tolkning av entreprenadavtalet}},
year = {{2016}},
}