Advanced

Befogad tillit och fullmaktskompetens - Vilken relevans har tredje parts uppfattning i svensk fullmaktsrätt?

Thulesius, Jacob LU (2016) JURM02 20161
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Fullmaktsrätten som rättsområde behandlar situationen då en representant (fullmäktige) rättshandlar med en tredje part för en principals (fullmaktsgivares) räkning och i principalens namn. Genom att representanten rättshandlar inom sin fullmaktskompetens blir principalen direkt avtalsbunden med tredje parten. Representanten står utanför avtalet, i enlighet med fullmaktsinstitutets partbindningsmönster.
Uppsatsen syftar till att utreda betydelsen av en tredje parts uppfattning angående en representants fullmaktskompetens i svensk rätt. Med en rättsanalytisk metod undersökts det svenska fullmaktsinstitutet för att belysa huruvida en tredje parts tillit påverkar frågan om en principal blir avtalsrättsligt bunden av en representants... (More)
Fullmaktsrätten som rättsområde behandlar situationen då en representant (fullmäktige) rättshandlar med en tredje part för en principals (fullmaktsgivares) räkning och i principalens namn. Genom att representanten rättshandlar inom sin fullmaktskompetens blir principalen direkt avtalsbunden med tredje parten. Representanten står utanför avtalet, i enlighet med fullmaktsinstitutets partbindningsmönster.
Uppsatsen syftar till att utreda betydelsen av en tredje parts uppfattning angående en representants fullmaktskompetens i svensk rätt. Med en rättsanalytisk metod undersökts det svenska fullmaktsinstitutet för att belysa huruvida en tredje parts tillit påverkar frågan om en principal blir avtalsrättsligt bunden av en representants rättshandlande i förhållande till en tredje part. Särskilt berör framställningen hur tillitsaspekter hanterats av HD i NJA 2014 s. 684. De svenska fullmaktsrättsliga reglerna jämförs även med representationsreglerna i det internationella soft law-dokumentet Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR).
Sammanfattningsvis är slutsatsen att tillitsaspekter har en väsentlig betydelse vid bestämmandet av fullmaktskompetensens gränser, och därmed för vad en representant får göra med avtalsbindande verkan för en principal. En fullmaktskompetens grundar sig på principalens viljeförklaringar och kompetensens gränser avgörs genom att viljeförklaringarna tolkas. Precis som vid tolkning av andra rättshandlingar är det centrala vad en tredje part kan fästa befogad tillit till. Det är en tredje parts befogade intryck av en fullmaktsgrundande viljeförklaring som är avgörande, inte principalens subjektiva avsikt med viljeförklaringen. Att tilliten måste vara befogad syftar till att förtydliga att den tredje partens subjektiva förståelse av en fullmaktsgrundande viljeförklaring inte är tillräcklig. Fullmaktskompetensens omfång avgörs alltså inte utifrån någon av parternas subjektiva perception.
I jämförelse med DCFR framstår den svenska fullmaktsregleringen som komplicerad, trots att rättsreglerna till stor del har samma innehåll. Systematiken kring den svenska regleringen på fullmaktsrättens område är förmodligen en av anledningarna till att betydelsen av en tredje parts befogade tillit lätt kan missförstås. Viss kritik riktas också mot den svenska företeelsen att beskriva fullmaktsinstitutet i termer av "fullmaktstyper", särskilt HD:s indelning i vilje- respektive tillitsgrundade fullmakter i NJA 2014 s. 684. Något som snarare försvårar förståelsen av fullmaktsrätten.
Slutligen kritiseras behovet av ett subjektivt insiktskrav på principalens sida i fullmaktsrättsliga situationer. Om omständigheter härrörande från principalen framstår som kompetensgrundande för en tredje person ur ett objektivt perspektiv borde det vara tillräckligt för att medföra bundenhet för principalen. (Less)
Abstract
As a branch of law, the rules of representation deals with the situation where a representative transacts with a third party on behalf of, and in the name of, a principal. The principal becomes directly contractually bound with the third party when the representative acts within the scope of the authority. The representative is not made a party to the contract, in accordance with the normal effects of the rules of representation on the legal positions of the involved parties.
The thesis aims to investigate the importance of a third party's perception regarding a representative's authority, under Swedish law. Using a legal analytical method, the Swedish rules of representation are studied to illustrate whether or not a third party's... (More)
As a branch of law, the rules of representation deals with the situation where a representative transacts with a third party on behalf of, and in the name of, a principal. The principal becomes directly contractually bound with the third party when the representative acts within the scope of the authority. The representative is not made a party to the contract, in accordance with the normal effects of the rules of representation on the legal positions of the involved parties.
The thesis aims to investigate the importance of a third party's perception regarding a representative's authority, under Swedish law. Using a legal analytical method, the Swedish rules of representation are studied to illustrate whether or not a third party's reliance affects the issue of when a principal becomes contractually bound due to a representative's legal acting with a third party. The paper especially deals with how elements of reliance have been addressed by the Swedish Supreme Court in the case NJA 2014 p. 684. The Swedish rules of representation are also compared with the rules of representation in the international soft law document Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR).
In summary, the conclusion is that elements of reliance have a material importance for the determination of the scope of the authority, and therefore regarding what the representative may do with effect on a principal's legal position. The authority is based on the principal's grant (declaration of intention) and the scope of the authority is determined by the interpretation of the grant. Just as with interpretation of other legal acts, the key perspective is what a third party can reasonably rely on. It is a third party's justified impression of an authorising grant (declaration of intention) that is vital, not the principal's subjective intention with the grant. The statement that the reliance must be justified aims to clarify that the third party's subjective understanding of an authorising grant (declaration of intent) is not sufficient. Consequently, the scope of the authority is not determined on the basis of any of the parties’ subjective conception.
In comparison with the DCFR, the Swedish rules of representation appear as complicated, despite the fact that the rules have largely the same content. The framework of the Swedish rules of representation is probably one of the reasons that the importance of a third party's justified reliance easily can be misunderstood. Some criticism is also levelled at the Swedish phenomenon of describing the rules of representation using categories of authority, especially the Supreme Court's departmentalisation of authority as founded on will or reliance in the case NJA 2014 p. 684. Something which rather impedes the understanding of the rules of representation.
Finally, the need for a subjective requirement of perception on the principal's side in the rules of representation is criticised. If circumstances derived from the principal appears as a granting of authority, from the objective perspective of a third party, it should be considered sufficient to affect the legal position of the principal. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Thulesius, Jacob LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Justified reliance and authority - What relevance does a third party's perception have under the Swedish rules of representation?
course
JURM02 20161
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
förmögenhetsrätt, civilrätt, komparativ rätt, fullmakt, fullmaktsrätt, representationsrätt, befogad tillit, tillitsfullmakt, agency law, DCFR, NJA 2014 s. 684, viljeförklaring, avtalsrätt, viljeprincipen, tillitsprincipen
language
Swedish
id
8873793
date added to LUP
2016-06-17 14:56:14
date last changed
2016-06-17 14:56:14
@misc{8873793,
  abstract     = {As a branch of law, the rules of representation deals with the situation where a representative transacts with a third party on behalf of, and in the name of, a principal. The principal becomes directly contractually bound with the third party when the representative acts within the scope of the authority. The representative is not made a party to the contract, in accordance with the normal effects of the rules of representation on the legal positions of the involved parties.
The thesis aims to investigate the importance of a third party's perception regarding a representative's authority, under Swedish law. Using a legal analytical method, the Swedish rules of representation are studied to illustrate whether or not a third party's reliance affects the issue of when a principal becomes contractually bound due to a representative's legal acting with a third party. The paper especially deals with how elements of reliance have been addressed by the Swedish Supreme Court in the case NJA 2014 p. 684. The Swedish rules of representation are also compared with the rules of representation in the international soft law document Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR).
In summary, the conclusion is that elements of reliance have a material importance for the determination of the scope of the authority, and therefore regarding what the representative may do with effect on a principal's legal position. The authority is based on the principal's grant (declaration of intention) and the scope of the authority is determined by the interpretation of the grant. Just as with interpretation of other legal acts, the key perspective is what a third party can reasonably rely on. It is a third party's justified impression of an authorising grant (declaration of intention) that is vital, not the principal's subjective intention with the grant. The statement that the reliance must be justified aims to clarify that the third party's subjective understanding of an authorising grant (declaration of intent) is not sufficient. Consequently, the scope of the authority is not determined on the basis of any of the parties’ subjective conception.
In comparison with the DCFR, the Swedish rules of representation appear as complicated, despite the fact that the rules have largely the same content. The framework of the Swedish rules of representation is probably one of the reasons that the importance of a third party's justified reliance easily can be misunderstood. Some criticism is also levelled at the Swedish phenomenon of describing the rules of representation using categories of authority, especially the Supreme Court's departmentalisation of authority as founded on will or reliance in the case NJA 2014 p. 684. Something which rather impedes the understanding of the rules of representation.
Finally, the need for a subjective requirement of perception on the principal's side in the rules of representation is criticised. If circumstances derived from the principal appears as a granting of authority, from the objective perspective of a third party, it should be considered sufficient to affect the legal position of the principal.},
  author       = {Thulesius, Jacob},
  keyword      = {förmögenhetsrätt,civilrätt,komparativ rätt,fullmakt,fullmaktsrätt,representationsrätt,befogad tillit,tillitsfullmakt,agency law,DCFR,NJA 2014 s. 684,viljeförklaring,avtalsrätt,viljeprincipen,tillitsprincipen},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Befogad tillit och fullmaktskompetens - Vilken relevans har tredje parts uppfattning i svensk fullmaktsrätt?},
  year         = {2016},
}