Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Köparens falska bevisbörda för varans kvarlämnande vid butiksvaruköp - och hur den påverkas av om det påstådda avtalsförhållandet anses utgöra ett blandavtal eller två separata avtal

Daun, Gustav LU (2019) LAGF03 20191
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
En konsuments påstående om att en köpt vara lämnats kvar i butiken efter köpet i syfte att näringsidkaren ska utföra arbeten på varan, kan betraktas som ett påstående om antingen ett blandavtal eller två separata avtal. Förutsatt att näringsidkaren menar att konsumenten fått med sig varan i samband med köpet kommer konsumenten att åläggas bevisbördan för att en överenskommelse om tjänst ingåtts. Det sistnämnda gäller oavsett om den påstådda överenskommelsen betraktas som en del av ett blandavtal eller ett separat tjänsteavtal. Om konsumenten inte har säkrat någon skriftlig bevisning, i form av t.ex. ett skriftligt avtal, kommer denne få svårt att uppfylla bevisbördan.

I NJA 2018 s 617 konstaterade Högsta domstolen att konsumenten... (More)
En konsuments påstående om att en köpt vara lämnats kvar i butiken efter köpet i syfte att näringsidkaren ska utföra arbeten på varan, kan betraktas som ett påstående om antingen ett blandavtal eller två separata avtal. Förutsatt att näringsidkaren menar att konsumenten fått med sig varan i samband med köpet kommer konsumenten att åläggas bevisbördan för att en överenskommelse om tjänst ingåtts. Det sistnämnda gäller oavsett om den påstådda överenskommelsen betraktas som en del av ett blandavtal eller ett separat tjänsteavtal. Om konsumenten inte har säkrat någon skriftlig bevisning, i form av t.ex. ett skriftligt avtal, kommer denne få svårt att uppfylla bevisbördan.

I NJA 2018 s 617 konstaterade Högsta domstolen att konsumenten dessutom bär en s.k. falsk bevisbörda för att varan inte avlämnats enligt köpeavtalet mellan parterna. Samtidigt valde domstolen att klassificera det påstådda avtalsförhållandet som två separata avtal.

I uppsatsen undersöks hur klassificeringsfrågan kan påverka köparens möjligheter att föra bevisning som medför att den falska bevisbördan anses uppfylld. Slutsatsen blir att frågan kan ha direkt avgörande betydelse. (Less)
Abstract
A consumer’s claim that a purchased item has been left in the store after the purchase, in order for the trader to carry out works on the goods, may be regarded as a claim about either a mixed agreement or two separate agreements. Provided that the trader claims that the consumer has brought the goods in connection to the purchase, the consumer will be required to bear the burden of proof that an agreement on service has been concluded. The latter applies regardless of whether the alleged agreement is regarded as part of a mixed agreement or a separate service agreement. Given that the consumer has not secured any written evidence, in the form of e.g. a written version of the agreement, the burden of proof will prove heavy to bear.

In... (More)
A consumer’s claim that a purchased item has been left in the store after the purchase, in order for the trader to carry out works on the goods, may be regarded as a claim about either a mixed agreement or two separate agreements. Provided that the trader claims that the consumer has brought the goods in connection to the purchase, the consumer will be required to bear the burden of proof that an agreement on service has been concluded. The latter applies regardless of whether the alleged agreement is regarded as part of a mixed agreement or a separate service agreement. Given that the consumer has not secured any written evidence, in the form of e.g. a written version of the agreement, the burden of proof will prove heavy to bear.

In the Swedish Supreme Court case NJA 2018 s 617, the Court stated that the consumer also carries a so-called false burden of proof regarding the fact that the goods have not been delivered in accordance to the purchase agreement between the parties. In addition to that, the Court chose to classify the alleged contractual relationship as two separate agreements.

This essay examines how the classification of the alleged agreement may affect the consumer’s ability to provide evidence that implies that the false burden of proof is considered fulfilled. The conclusion is that the classification may have decisive significance. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Daun, Gustav LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20191
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
processrätt, bevisbörda, blandavtal, butiksvaruköp, bevisvärdering, bevisvärde, falsk bevisbörda, beviskrav
language
Swedish
id
8977365
date added to LUP
2019-09-16 10:24:07
date last changed
2019-09-16 10:24:07
@misc{8977365,
  abstract     = {{A consumer’s claim that a purchased item has been left in the store after the purchase, in order for the trader to carry out works on the goods, may be regarded as a claim about either a mixed agreement or two separate agreements. Provided that the trader claims that the consumer has brought the goods in connection to the purchase, the consumer will be required to bear the burden of proof that an agreement on service has been concluded. The latter applies regardless of whether the alleged agreement is regarded as part of a mixed agreement or a separate service agreement. Given that the consumer has not secured any written evidence, in the form of e.g. a written version of the agreement, the burden of proof will prove heavy to bear. 

In the Swedish Supreme Court case NJA 2018 s 617, the Court stated that the consumer also carries a so-called false burden of proof regarding the fact that the goods have not been delivered in accordance to the purchase agreement between the parties. In addition to that, the Court chose to classify the alleged contractual relationship as two separate agreements. 

This essay examines how the classification of the alleged agreement may affect the consumer’s ability to provide evidence that implies that the false burden of proof is considered fulfilled. The conclusion is that the classification may have decisive significance.}},
  author       = {{Daun, Gustav}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Köparens falska bevisbörda för varans kvarlämnande vid butiksvaruköp - och hur den påverkas av om det påstådda avtalsförhållandet anses utgöra ett blandavtal eller två separata avtal}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}