Advanced

Apoteksväsendet och förstatligandet

Lindskog, David LU (2018) JURM02 20181
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
This thesis takes aim at the historical events that changed the pharmacists’ privilege and their sole right to run pharmacies. The thesis also investigates these changes in relation to the nationalization of the pharmacies that took place 1970 and the foregoing events.

The pharmacists have historically had a special position in relation to other professions. For almost three centuries the pharmacists had an exclusive right to run pharmacies by virtue of a certain privilege issued by the monarch. For a long time the privilege gave the owner a right to continue the business for an unsettled period and to transfer the privilege at his or her own discretion. These rights among others gradually disappeared as certain changes started to occur... (More)
This thesis takes aim at the historical events that changed the pharmacists’ privilege and their sole right to run pharmacies. The thesis also investigates these changes in relation to the nationalization of the pharmacies that took place 1970 and the foregoing events.

The pharmacists have historically had a special position in relation to other professions. For almost three centuries the pharmacists had an exclusive right to run pharmacies by virtue of a certain privilege issued by the monarch. For a long time the privilege gave the owner a right to continue the business for an unsettled period and to transfer the privilege at his or her own discretion. These rights among others gradually disappeared as certain changes started to occur towards the end of the 19th century.

In the beginning of the 20th century the opinion grew strong that a reform of the pharmacies was needed, which started a comprehensive investigation. Several governmental investigations examined the possibilities to nationalize the pharmacies but it wasn’t performed until 1970.

The first changes of the privilege had very little implication on the divestiture, that is the duty for the pharmacists to give up their privilege. The rules about divestiture was introduced in 1921 but the legal width of the regulation wasn’t settled for over two decades. It has not been discovered anything in this thesis that indicates that the changes was made in order to weaken the legal status of the privilege and make way for the nationalization.

It is not impossible to say that these changes was made in order to make way for the government takeover but the results show differently. The legal width of the change in 1921 seems to have appeared by chance. The nationalization 1970 seems to be based on factors other than the elimination of the holdback that the privilege previously had made out. Thus, there is no connection between the changes and the nationalization. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Den här uppsatsen tar sikte på de historiska förändringar av apoteksprivilegiet som urholkade apotekarnas ensamrätt att bedriva apoteksverksamhet. Uppsatsen undersöker också dessa förändringar i förhållande till förstatligandet av apoteken som ägde rum 1970 samt perioden som föregick det.

Apotekaryrket har historiskt haft en särskild ställning i förhållande till andra yrkeskategorier. I nära trehundra år hade apotekarna en ensamrätt att bedriva apoteksverksamhet med stöd av ett särskilt apoteksprivilegium som utfärdades av Kungl. Maj:t. Privilegiet gav innehavaren under en lång period bl.a. rätten att fortsätta verksamheten på obestämd tid och att fritt överlåta privilegiet. Dessa rättigheter och många fler försvann gradvis när vissa... (More)
Den här uppsatsen tar sikte på de historiska förändringar av apoteksprivilegiet som urholkade apotekarnas ensamrätt att bedriva apoteksverksamhet. Uppsatsen undersöker också dessa förändringar i förhållande till förstatligandet av apoteken som ägde rum 1970 samt perioden som föregick det.

Apotekaryrket har historiskt haft en särskild ställning i förhållande till andra yrkeskategorier. I nära trehundra år hade apotekarna en ensamrätt att bedriva apoteksverksamhet med stöd av ett särskilt apoteksprivilegium som utfärdades av Kungl. Maj:t. Privilegiet gav innehavaren under en lång period bl.a. rätten att fortsätta verksamheten på obestämd tid och att fritt överlåta privilegiet. Dessa rättigheter och många fler försvann gradvis när vissa ändringar började tillkomma mot slutet av 1800-talet.

Under början av 1900-talet började frågan om att reformera apoteksväsendet växa sig stark, med omfattande utredningsarbete som följd. Flera utredningar undersökte möjligheterna att förstatliga apoteken men fick inte genomslag förrän 1970.

De första ändringarna som gjordes i privilegiet reglerade endast i viss mån avhändandet, dvs. reglerna för när apotekarna tvingades avstå privilegiet. Regleringen om avhändande tillkom 1921 men den rättsliga innebörden utreddes dock långt senare. Det har inte framkommit något i denna uppsats som tyder på att ändringarna skulle ha tillkommit i syfte att försvaga privilegiets skydd från återtagande och bana väg för ett förstatligande.

Det går inte att säga med bestämdhet om dessa ändringar var ämnade att underlätta ett eventuellt statligt övertagande men resultatet tyder på annat. Att ändringen 1921 skulle ha avgörande betydelse för privilegiets rättsliga innebörd tycks snarare ha varit utfallet av en slump. Själva genomförandet av förstatligandet 1970 tycks snarare ha berott på andra faktorer än att hindret som privilegiet uppställde sedan länge var undanröjt. Det går alltså inte att påvisa något samband mellan ändringarna i privilegiet och förstatligandet. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Lindskog, David LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
The pharmacy system and the nationalization
course
JURM02 20181
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
rättshistoria
language
Swedish
id
8941809
date added to LUP
2018-06-08 13:21:35
date last changed
2018-06-08 13:21:35
@misc{8941809,
  abstract     = {This thesis takes aim at the historical events that changed the pharmacists’ privilege and their sole right to run pharmacies. The thesis also investigates these changes in relation to the nationalization of the pharmacies that took place 1970 and the foregoing events.

The pharmacists have historically had a special position in relation to other professions. For almost three centuries the pharmacists had an exclusive right to run pharmacies by virtue of a certain privilege issued by the monarch. For a long time the privilege gave the owner a right to continue the business for an unsettled period and to transfer the privilege at his or her own discretion. These rights among others gradually disappeared as certain changes started to occur towards the end of the 19th century.

In the beginning of the 20th century the opinion grew strong that a reform of the pharmacies was needed, which started a comprehensive investigation. Several governmental investigations examined the possibilities to nationalize the pharmacies but it wasn’t performed until 1970.

The first changes of the privilege had very little implication on the divestiture, that is the duty for the pharmacists to give up their privilege. The rules about divestiture was introduced in 1921 but the legal width of the regulation wasn’t settled for over two decades. It has not been discovered anything in this thesis that indicates that the changes was made in order to weaken the legal status of the privilege and make way for the nationalization.

It is not impossible to say that these changes was made in order to make way for the government takeover but the results show differently. The legal width of the change in 1921 seems to have appeared by chance. The nationalization 1970 seems to be based on factors other than the elimination of the holdback that the privilege previously had made out. Thus, there is no connection between the changes and the nationalization.},
  author       = {Lindskog, David},
  keyword      = {rättshistoria},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Apoteksväsendet och förstatligandet},
  year         = {2018},
}