Advanced

Ja, vi elsker dette prinsippet

Birkaskog, Joel LU (2019) LAGF03 20191
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
In Swedish and Norwegian litigation cases, the evidence situation is handled in very different ways. Swedish law uses burden of proof while Norwegian law uses the overweight principle. The purpose of the thesis is to distinguish and, based on a perspective of legal certainty, comment on the differences between the methods.

The burden of proof is brought to light when the parties in a dispute come with each their competing claim. It then becomes up to the judge to impose the burden of proof on one of the parties. This means that the party in question, with the help of evidence, must come up with the proof requirement that has been put forward for their claim to be the basis for the judgment. If they fail, the judgment will be added to... (More)
In Swedish and Norwegian litigation cases, the evidence situation is handled in very different ways. Swedish law uses burden of proof while Norwegian law uses the overweight principle. The purpose of the thesis is to distinguish and, based on a perspective of legal certainty, comment on the differences between the methods.

The burden of proof is brought to light when the parties in a dispute come with each their competing claim. It then becomes up to the judge to impose the burden of proof on one of the parties. This means that the party in question, with the help of evidence, must come up with the proof requirement that has been put forward for their claim to be the basis for the judgment. If they fail, the judgment will be added to the other party's claim. Thus, this party does not have to reach any evidence that the judgment must be based on its claim, it is sufficient that the party having the burden of proof fails to reach it.

The overweight principle is raised in the same situation as the burden of proof but solves the problem in a different way. Instead of burdening one of the parties, it is up to each and every one to prove that one's own claim is more likely than the other party's. The judge has the task of deciding which claim is most likely and then base the judgment on it. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
I svenska och norska tvistemål hanteras bevissituationen på väldigt skilda sätt. Svensk rätt använder bevisbörda medan norsk rätt använder överviktsprincipen. Syftet med uppsatsen är att urskilja och, utifrån ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv, kommentera skillnaderna metoderna emellan.

Bevisbördan aktualiseras då parterna i en tvist kommer med var sitt konkurrerande påstående. Det blir då upp till domaren att ålägga bevisbördan på en av parterna. Detta innebär att parten med sin bevisning måste komma upp till det beviskrav som har lagts fram för att hens påstående ska läggas till grund för domen. Om hen misslyckas med det är det istället den andre partens påstående som läggs till grund för utgången i målet. Den andra parten behöver alltså... (More)
I svenska och norska tvistemål hanteras bevissituationen på väldigt skilda sätt. Svensk rätt använder bevisbörda medan norsk rätt använder överviktsprincipen. Syftet med uppsatsen är att urskilja och, utifrån ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv, kommentera skillnaderna metoderna emellan.

Bevisbördan aktualiseras då parterna i en tvist kommer med var sitt konkurrerande påstående. Det blir då upp till domaren att ålägga bevisbördan på en av parterna. Detta innebär att parten med sin bevisning måste komma upp till det beviskrav som har lagts fram för att hens påstående ska läggas till grund för domen. Om hen misslyckas med det är det istället den andre partens påstående som läggs till grund för utgången i målet. Den andra parten behöver alltså inte nå upp till något beviskrav för att domen ska grundas på dess påstående, det räcker att parten som har bevisbörda misslyckas att nå upp till beviskravet.

Överviktsprincipen aktualiseras vid samma situation som bevisbördan, men löser problemet på ett annat sätt. Istället för att bördan läggs på en av parterna är det upp till var och en att genom bevisning visa att ens eget påstående är mer sannolikt än den andra partens. Domaren har i uppgift att avgöra vilket påstående som är mest sannolikt och sedan basera domen utifrån det. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Birkaskog, Joel LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20191
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
komparativ rätt, bevisbörda, överviktsprincipen, sannsynlighet, bevisburde, civilrätt, processrätt
language
Swedish
id
8977358
date added to LUP
2019-12-12 10:24:38
date last changed
2019-12-12 10:24:38
@misc{8977358,
  abstract     = {In Swedish and Norwegian litigation cases, the evidence situation is handled in very different ways. Swedish law uses burden of proof while Norwegian law uses the overweight principle. The purpose of the thesis is to distinguish and, based on a perspective of legal certainty, comment on the differences between the methods.

The burden of proof is brought to light when the parties in a dispute come with each their competing claim. It then becomes up to the judge to impose the burden of proof on one of the parties. This means that the party in question, with the help of evidence, must come up with the proof requirement that has been put forward for their claim to be the basis for the judgment. If they fail, the judgment will be added to the other party's claim. Thus, this party does not have to reach any evidence that the judgment must be based on its claim, it is sufficient that the party having the burden of proof fails to reach it.

The overweight principle is raised in the same situation as the burden of proof but solves the problem in a different way. Instead of burdening one of the parties, it is up to each and every one to prove that one's own claim is more likely than the other party's. The judge has the task of deciding which claim is most likely and then base the judgment on it.},
  author       = {Birkaskog, Joel},
  keyword      = {komparativ rätt,bevisbörda,överviktsprincipen,sannsynlighet,bevisburde,civilrätt,processrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Ja, vi elsker dette prinsippet},
  year         = {2019},
}