Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Sambors efterlevandeskydd – En rättsvetenskaplig uppsats om sambors efterlevandeskydd i Sverige och Finland

Sundblad, Elin LU (2018) LAGF03 20181
Faculty of Law
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Under de senaste årtiondena har samhället förändrats och idag är samboförhållandet en vanlig samlevnadsform i både Sverige och Finland. Trots liknande rättskultur, skiljer sig sambors efterlevandeskydd åt i dessa länder. Syftet med denna uppsats är i första hand att, mot bakgrund av sambolagstiftningen i Sverige och Finland, redogöra för likheter och skillnader gällande sambors efterlevandeskydd i respektive land och försöka fastställa vad dessa skillnader beror på. I andra hand ska jag undersöka om och hur en efterlevande sambo i respektive land kan uppnå ett starkare ekonomiskt skydd än det rättsliga skydd som lagstiftningen automatiskt ger. För att uppnå uppsatsens syften undersöks framför allt hur sambors efterlevandeskydd skiljer sig... (More)
Under de senaste årtiondena har samhället förändrats och idag är samboförhållandet en vanlig samlevnadsform i både Sverige och Finland. Trots liknande rättskultur, skiljer sig sambors efterlevandeskydd åt i dessa länder. Syftet med denna uppsats är i första hand att, mot bakgrund av sambolagstiftningen i Sverige och Finland, redogöra för likheter och skillnader gällande sambors efterlevandeskydd i respektive land och försöka fastställa vad dessa skillnader beror på. I andra hand ska jag undersöka om och hur en efterlevande sambo i respektive land kan uppnå ett starkare ekonomiskt skydd än det rättsliga skydd som lagstiftningen automatiskt ger. För att uppnå uppsatsens syften undersöks framför allt hur sambors efterlevandeskydd skiljer sig åt i Sverige och Finland samt om den respektive nuvarande lagstiftningen är tillräcklig i dagens samhälle eller om den bör förstärkas.

I både Sverige och Finland saknar en efterlevande sambo arvsrätt. Om någon av samborna avlider, fördelas arvet enligt den legala arvsordningen, där efterlevande sambo inte ingår. Lagstiftaren i bägge länder har dock infört ett skydd för en efterlevande sambo i respektive lands sambolagstiftning. I Sverige utgörs det rättsliga efterlevandeskyddet för sambor av rätten att begära bodelning av sambors gemensamma bostad och bohag, den så kallade lilla basbeloppsregeln och rätten att överta bostad i vissa fall. I Finland utgörs det rättsliga efterlevandeskyddet för sambor av rätten att kräva åtskiljande av sambornas egendom, rätten till gottgörelse och rätten att efter prövning få bidrag ur den avlidna sambons kvarlåtenskap. Enligt den finska sambolagen omfattas dock enbart sambor som bott i gemensamt hushåll i minst fem år eller har eller har haft ett gemensamt barn av detta skydd.

I både Sverige och Finland kan sambor själva stärka sitt efterlevandeskydd genom att upprätta ett testamente eller teckna en livförsäkring. Dessutom har sambor i Sverige möjlighet att stärka sitt efterlevandeskydd genom att ingå ett avtal om sammanlevnad i oskiftat dödsbo.

Att sambors efterlevandeskydd skiljer sig åt i Sverige och Finland kan bero på att Sverige fick en sambolagstiftning redan år 1973 medan Finland inte fick en sambolagstiftning förrän år 2011, varför det i Sverige under en lång tid har diskuterats hur sambors efterlevandeskydd kunde förstärkas. Det kan även bero på att den svenska sambolagen syftar till att ge ett minimiskydd åt den svagare parten när samboförhållandet upphör, medan den finska sambolagen syftar till att den ena sambon inte ska få obehörig vinst på den andra sambons bekostnad.

I min analys jämför jag den svenska och finska sambolagstiftningen gällande sambors efterlevandeskydd och kommer fram till att den svenska sambolagstiftningen ger ett starkare skydd för en efterlevande sambo än den finska sambolagstiftningen. Trots det är varken den nuvarande svenska eller den nuvarande finska lagstiftningen gällande sambors efterlevandeskydd tillräcklig med tanke på att samboförhållandet är en vanlig samlevnadsform i dagens samhälle. Därför bör den, enligt min åsikt, förstärkas genom att testationsfriheten utökas så att samborna får testamentera all sin kvarlåtenskap, inklusive de gemensamma barnens laglotter, till varandra med efterarvsrätt för barnen. Däremot bör, enligt min åsikt, arvsrätt för efterlevande sambo inte införas. (Less)
Abstract
In recent decades, society has changed and today, the cohabitee relationship is a common form of cohabitation in both Sweden and Finland. Despite similar legal culture, the survivor’s protection of cohabitees differs in these countries. The purpose of this essay is firstly, in the light of the legislation for cohabitees in Sweden and Finland, to describe similarities and differences regarding the survivor’s protection of cohabitees in each country, and try to determine what these differences are due to. Secondarily, I will examine if and how a surviving cohabitee in each country can achieve a stronger financial protection than the legal protection provided by law automatically. In order to achieve the purposes of the essay, it is examined... (More)
In recent decades, society has changed and today, the cohabitee relationship is a common form of cohabitation in both Sweden and Finland. Despite similar legal culture, the survivor’s protection of cohabitees differs in these countries. The purpose of this essay is firstly, in the light of the legislation for cohabitees in Sweden and Finland, to describe similarities and differences regarding the survivor’s protection of cohabitees in each country, and try to determine what these differences are due to. Secondarily, I will examine if and how a surviving cohabitee in each country can achieve a stronger financial protection than the legal protection provided by law automatically. In order to achieve the purposes of the essay, it is examined above all how the survivor’s protection of cohabitees differ in Sweden and Finland and whether the respective current legislation is sufficient in today’s society or if it should be strengthened.

In both Sweden and Finland, a surviving cohabitee lacks right of inheritance. If any of the cohabitees deceases, the inheritance is divided according to the legal inheritance scheme, where a surviving cohabitee is not included. However, the legislator in both countries has introduced a protection for a surviving cohabitee in respective country's legislation for cohabitees. In Sweden, the cohabitees’ legal survivor’s protection consists of the right to request estate division of cohabitees’ common apartment and household goods, the so-called small base amount rule and the right to take over apartment in certain cases. In Finland, the cohabitees’ legal survivor’s protection consists of the right to demand separation of the common law spouses’ property, the right to indemnification and the right to, after examination, receive grant from the deceased cohabitee’s estate. According to the Finnish Cohabitees Act, however, only cohabitees, who have lived in common household for at least five years or have or have had a common child is covered by this protection.

In both Sweden and Finland, cohabitees can themselves strengthen their survivor’s protection by drawing up a will or signing a life insurance. In addition, cohabitees in Sweden have the opportunity to strengthen their survivor’s protection by entering into an agreement on cohabitation in undivided estate.

That the survivor’s protection of cohabitees differs in Sweden and Finland may be due to the fact that Sweden received a legislation for cohabitees already in 1973, while Finland did not receive a legislation for cohabitees until 2011, why it in Sweden for a long time has been discussed how the survivor’s protection of cohabitees could be strengthened. It may also be due to the fact that the Swedish Cohabitees Act aims to provide a minimum level of protection for the weaker party, when the cohabitee relationship ends, while the Finnish Cohabitees Act aims to ensure that one cohabitee does not receive unauthorized profit at the expense of the other cohabitee.

In my analysis, I compare the Swedish and Finnish legislation regarding the survivor’s protection of cohabitees and conclude that the Swedish legislation for cohabitees provides a stronger protection for a surviving cohabitee than the Finnish legislation. However, neither the current Swedish nor the current Finnish legislation regarding the survivor’s protection of cohabitees is sufficient given the fact that the cohabitee relationship is a common form of cohabitation in today’s society. Therefore, in my opinion, it should be strengthened by extending the freedom of testamentary disposition so that the cohabitees may will all their estate, including the common children’s lawful share, to each other with the right of secondary inheritance for the children. However, in my opinion, inheritance right for surviving cohabitee should not be introduced. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Sundblad, Elin LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20181
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
familjerätt, komparativ rätt, Finland, sambo, samboförhållande, efterlevandeskydd, arvsrätt
language
Swedish
id
8941608
date added to LUP
2018-07-15 13:34:31
date last changed
2018-07-15 13:34:31
@misc{8941608,
  abstract     = {{In recent decades, society has changed and today, the cohabitee relationship is a common form of cohabitation in both Sweden and Finland. Despite similar legal culture, the survivor’s protection of cohabitees differs in these countries. The purpose of this essay is firstly, in the light of the legislation for cohabitees in Sweden and Finland, to describe similarities and differences regarding the survivor’s protection of cohabitees in each country, and try to determine what these differences are due to. Secondarily, I will examine if and how a surviving cohabitee in each country can achieve a stronger financial protection than the legal protection provided by law automatically. In order to achieve the purposes of the essay, it is examined above all how the survivor’s protection of cohabitees differ in Sweden and Finland and whether the respective current legislation is sufficient in today’s society or if it should be strengthened.

In both Sweden and Finland, a surviving cohabitee lacks right of inheritance. If any of the cohabitees deceases, the inheritance is divided according to the legal inheritance scheme, where a surviving cohabitee is not included. However, the legislator in both countries has introduced a protection for a surviving cohabitee in respective country's legislation for cohabitees. In Sweden, the cohabitees’ legal survivor’s protection consists of the right to request estate division of cohabitees’ common apartment and household goods, the so-called small base amount rule and the right to take over apartment in certain cases. In Finland, the cohabitees’ legal survivor’s protection consists of the right to demand separation of the common law spouses’ property, the right to indemnification and the right to, after examination, receive grant from the deceased cohabitee’s estate. According to the Finnish Cohabitees Act, however, only cohabitees, who have lived in common household for at least five years or have or have had a common child is covered by this protection.

In both Sweden and Finland, cohabitees can themselves strengthen their survivor’s protection by drawing up a will or signing a life insurance. In addition, cohabitees in Sweden have the opportunity to strengthen their survivor’s protection by entering into an agreement on cohabitation in undivided estate.

That the survivor’s protection of cohabitees differs in Sweden and Finland may be due to the fact that Sweden received a legislation for cohabitees already in 1973, while Finland did not receive a legislation for cohabitees until 2011, why it in Sweden for a long time has been discussed how the survivor’s protection of cohabitees could be strengthened. It may also be due to the fact that the Swedish Cohabitees Act aims to provide a minimum level of protection for the weaker party, when the cohabitee relationship ends, while the Finnish Cohabitees Act aims to ensure that one cohabitee does not receive unauthorized profit at the expense of the other cohabitee.

In my analysis, I compare the Swedish and Finnish legislation regarding the survivor’s protection of cohabitees and conclude that the Swedish legislation for cohabitees provides a stronger protection for a surviving cohabitee than the Finnish legislation. However, neither the current Swedish nor the current Finnish legislation regarding the survivor’s protection of cohabitees is sufficient given the fact that the cohabitee relationship is a common form of cohabitation in today’s society. Therefore, in my opinion, it should be strengthened by extending the freedom of testamentary disposition so that the cohabitees may will all their estate, including the common children’s lawful share, to each other with the right of secondary inheritance for the children. However, in my opinion, inheritance right for surviving cohabitee should not be introduced.}},
  author       = {{Sundblad, Elin}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Sambors efterlevandeskydd – En rättsvetenskaplig uppsats om sambors efterlevandeskydd i Sverige och Finland}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}