Advanced

Avtalsingående enligt avtalslagen och CISG - En komparativ och rättsekonomisk undersökning

Johnsson, Anna LU (2016) LAGM01 20161
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Lagen (1915:218) om avtal och andra rättshandlingar på förmögenhetsrättens område, AvtL och Internationella köplagen eller United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, CISG, innehåller båda bestämmelser om ingående av avtal som bygger på en anbud-acceptmodell. Även om båda regelverken har samma grundstruktur, skiljer de sig åt i några avseenden, särskilt ifråga om möjligheten att återkalla anbud.
I denna uppsats undersöker, jämför och belyser jag likheterna och skillnaderna mellan avtalsingående enligt AvtL och enligt CISG. Inledningsvis behandlar jag hur avtal sluts enligt de båda regelverken, samt vilka likheter och skillnader som finns mellan dem. Jag undersöker sedan ett par av de huvudsakliga... (More)
Lagen (1915:218) om avtal och andra rättshandlingar på förmögenhetsrättens område, AvtL och Internationella köplagen eller United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, CISG, innehåller båda bestämmelser om ingående av avtal som bygger på en anbud-acceptmodell. Även om båda regelverken har samma grundstruktur, skiljer de sig åt i några avseenden, särskilt ifråga om möjligheten att återkalla anbud.
I denna uppsats undersöker, jämför och belyser jag likheterna och skillnaderna mellan avtalsingående enligt AvtL och enligt CISG. Inledningsvis behandlar jag hur avtal sluts enligt de båda regelverken, samt vilka likheter och skillnader som finns mellan dem. Jag undersöker sedan ett par av de huvudsakliga skillnaderna närmare, varpå jag gör en analys av vilken lösning som framstår som lämpligast. Den mest påtagliga skillnaden är, som antytts, bestämmelserna som reglerar återkallelse av anbud. Dessa bestämmelser, som bygger på löftesprincipen resp. kontraktsprincipen, behandlar jag separat. Utifrån ett ekonomiskt perspektiv analyserar jag vilken av löftesprincipen och kontraktsprincipen som framstår som mest effektiv och mot bakgrund av detta resultat samt övrig forskning utreder jag huruvida löftesprincipen, som återfinns i AvtL och som har ifrågasatts inom svensk doktrin, bör ersättas av kontraktsprincipen. Uppsatsen antar ett komparativt resp. ett rättsekonomiskt perspektiv och är författad med hjälp av juridisk metod.
Resultatet av uppsatsen visar att AvtL:s och CISG:s modeller uppvisar många likheter, framförallt i att grundsystemet för avtalsslutande är detsamma. En tydlig skillnad är att AvtL innehåller fler subjektiva moment än CISG, som genomgående bygger på mer objektiva moment. De objektiva bedömningarna enligt CISG är enligt min mening fördelaktiga ifråga om huruvida en anbudstagare ska bli bunden av sin passivitet om denne låter bli att reklamera en oren accept, men vad gäller återkallelse/tillbakadragande av anbud och accept konstaterar jag att det motsatta förhållandet gäller, dvs. i det fallet borde AvtL:s bestämmelse vara lämpligast. Ur ett ekonomiskt perspektiv framstår löftesprincipen som mest effektiv. Vid en sammantagen bedömning grundad på detta resultat samt analys utifrån tidigare forskning har jag ansett att det har varit svårt att ta ställning till huruvida löftesprincipen i AvtL bör ersättas av kontraktsprincipen, men jag lutar närmast åt att den bör behållas. (Less)
Abstract
Lagen (1915:218) om avtal och andra rättshandlingar på förmögenhetsrättens område, AvtL, and the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, CISG, both contain provisions on the conclusion of contracts based on an offer-acceptance model. Although both legal systems have the same basic structure, they differ in some aspects, especially regarding the possibility to revoke an offer.
In this thesis I examine, compare and highlight similarities and differences between contract conclusion according to AvtL and under the CISG. Initially, I examine how contracts are concluded under the two schemes, as well as the similarities and differences between them. I then examine a few of the main differences closer, and... (More)
Lagen (1915:218) om avtal och andra rättshandlingar på förmögenhetsrättens område, AvtL, and the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, CISG, both contain provisions on the conclusion of contracts based on an offer-acceptance model. Although both legal systems have the same basic structure, they differ in some aspects, especially regarding the possibility to revoke an offer.
In this thesis I examine, compare and highlight similarities and differences between contract conclusion according to AvtL and under the CISG. Initially, I examine how contracts are concluded under the two schemes, as well as the similarities and differences between them. I then examine a few of the main differences closer, and then I make an analysis of which solution that seems most appropriate. The most obvious difference is, as indicated, the rules governing revocation of offers. These provisions, which are based on the promise principle and the contract principle respectively I treat separately. From an economic perspective, I analyse which of the promise principle and the contract principle that appears to be the most effective and in the light of this result, as well as other results from research, I examine if the promise principle, which has been criticised in the Swedish doctrine, should be replaced by the promise principle. The paper adopts a comparative respectively an economic perspective and is based on the application of legal method.
The results of the thesis show that AvtL’s and CISG’s models have many similarities, in particular as the basic system for contracting is the same. One clear difference is that AvtL includes more subjective elements than CISG, which is consistently based on more objective elements. The objective assessments under the CISG is in my opinion favourable in question if a tenderer shall be bound by his passivity if he fails to make a reclamation when he has received an acceptance which is not clean, but in terms of revocation/withdrawal of the offer and acceptance, I note that the opposite is true, i.e., in that case should AvtL’s provision be more appropriate. From an economic perspective, the promise principle is most effective. In an overall assessment based on these results and the analysis based on previous research, I felt that it was difficult to decide whether the promise principle of AvtL should be replaced by the contract principle, but I'm leaning towards that it should be retained. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Johnsson, Anna LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Contract conclusion according to avtalslagen and CISG - a comparative examination
course
LAGM01 20161
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
avtalsrätt, förmögenhetsrätt
language
Swedish
id
8863834
date added to LUP
2016-03-30 14:46:46
date last changed
2016-03-30 14:46:46
@misc{8863834,
  abstract     = {Lagen (1915:218) om avtal och andra rättshandlingar på förmögenhetsrättens område, AvtL, and the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, CISG, both contain provisions on the conclusion of contracts based on an offer-acceptance model. Although both legal systems have the same basic structure, they differ in some aspects, especially regarding the possibility to revoke an offer.
 In this thesis I examine, compare and highlight similarities and differences between contract conclusion according to AvtL and under the CISG. Initially, I examine how contracts are concluded under the two schemes, as well as the similarities and differences between them. I then examine a few of the main differences closer, and then I make an analysis of which solution that seems most appropriate. The most obvious difference is, as indicated, the rules governing revocation of offers. These provisions, which are based on the promise principle and the contract principle respectively I treat separately. From an economic perspective, I analyse which of the promise principle and the contract principle that appears to be the most effective and in the light of this result, as well as other results from research, I examine if the promise principle, which has been criticised in the Swedish doctrine, should be replaced by the promise principle. The paper adopts a comparative respectively an economic perspective and is based on the application of legal method.
 The results of the thesis show that AvtL’s and CISG’s models have many similarities, in particular as the basic system for contracting is the same. One clear difference is that AvtL includes more subjective elements than CISG, which is consistently based on more objective elements. The objective assessments under the CISG is in my opinion favourable in question if a tenderer shall be bound by his passivity if he fails to make a reclamation when he has received an acceptance which is not clean, but in terms of revocation/withdrawal of the offer and acceptance, I note that the opposite is true, i.e., in that case should AvtL’s provision be more appropriate. From an economic perspective, the promise principle is most effective. In an overall assessment based on these results and the analysis based on previous research, I felt that it was difficult to decide whether the promise principle of AvtL should be replaced by the contract principle, but I'm leaning towards that it should be retained.},
  author       = {Johnsson, Anna},
  keyword      = {avtalsrätt,förmögenhetsrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Avtalsingående enligt avtalslagen och CISG - En komparativ och rättsekonomisk undersökning},
  year         = {2016},
}