Minerallagstiftningen - En undersökning av dess förhållande till egendomsskyddet och andra motstående intressen
(2020) LAGF03 20201Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Egendomsskyddet är en grundläggande rättighet som följer av både RF och EKMR vilka stadgar var och ens rätt till egendom. Regleringen är emellertid inte ovillkorligt tryggad, inskränkningar kan göras då ett allmänt angeläget intresse motiverar detta. Ett sådant angeläget allmänt intresse är gruvverksamhet, vilken regleras genom MinL, som berättigar inskränkningar i egendomsskyddet.
Uppsatsen syftar till att analysera lagstiftarens avvägningar mellan olika motstående intressen då egendomsskyddet inskränks genom MinL. En rättsanalytisk och rättshistorisk metod appliceras för att möjliggöra syftets utredande.
RF:s egendomsskydd har ständigt utvecklats till markägares förmån. Vid inskränkningar av denna rättighet krävs ett angeläget... (More) - Egendomsskyddet är en grundläggande rättighet som följer av både RF och EKMR vilka stadgar var och ens rätt till egendom. Regleringen är emellertid inte ovillkorligt tryggad, inskränkningar kan göras då ett allmänt angeläget intresse motiverar detta. Ett sådant angeläget allmänt intresse är gruvverksamhet, vilken regleras genom MinL, som berättigar inskränkningar i egendomsskyddet.
Uppsatsen syftar till att analysera lagstiftarens avvägningar mellan olika motstående intressen då egendomsskyddet inskränks genom MinL. En rättsanalytisk och rättshistorisk metod appliceras för att möjliggöra syftets utredande.
RF:s egendomsskydd har ständigt utvecklats till markägares förmån. Vid inskränkningar av denna rättighet krävs ett angeläget allmänt intresse som motiverar detta samt en proportionalitetsavvägning. I de fall då inskränkningar sker berättigas markägaren ersättning i olika omfattning beroende på om det är fråga om en expropriation eller rådighetsinskränkning. Var och en har också rätt att nyttja annans mark genom allemansrätten.
Minerallagstiftningen har sina rötter i 1300-talets Sverige och speglar än idag efter drygt 700 års utveckling det starka intresse som staten har i gruvverksamhet. Principen om ”först till kvarn”, eller annars känt som inmutningssystemet, lever kvar än idag. Innebärande den som först gör anspråk på eller visar intresse för prospektering av mineraler är den som ges ensamrätt till detta. Denna rätt kan ges även då markägare motsätter sig sådana tillstånd.
Trots gruvverksamheters stora miljöpåverkan vidtas inga vidare miljöprövningar för kartläggning av verksamhetens konsekvenser. Detta är en direkt följd av lagstiftarens intresse att inte tynga den redan ekonomiskt
4
kostsamma gruvverksamheten. Då vägs alltså två motstående allmänna intressen gentemot varandra, det ekonomiska intresset mot det miljömässiga.
Det finns inget som tyder på att MinLs utformning idag strider mot vare sig RF eller EKMR. Däremot finns det potential för förändringar, som i bästa fall skulle leda till en utvidgad miljöprövning samt utökade rättigheter för markägare vid inskränkningar i egendomsskyddet berättigade genom MinL. (Less) - Abstract
- The protection of property is a fundamental right that is regulated by both The Instrument of Government act and ECHR which establish every person's right to property. However, the regulation is not unconditionally guaranteed, restrictions can be made as a common public interest justifies it. One such common public interest is mining operations, which is regulated by the Swedish mineral act that justifies restrictions in every person's right to protection of property.
The thesis aims to analyse the legislature's balance between different opposing interests when the protection of the property is derogated by the Swedish mineral act. A legal-analytic and legal-historical method is applied to enable the purpose of investigation.
The... (More) - The protection of property is a fundamental right that is regulated by both The Instrument of Government act and ECHR which establish every person's right to property. However, the regulation is not unconditionally guaranteed, restrictions can be made as a common public interest justifies it. One such common public interest is mining operations, which is regulated by the Swedish mineral act that justifies restrictions in every person's right to protection of property.
The thesis aims to analyse the legislature's balance between different opposing interests when the protection of the property is derogated by the Swedish mineral act. A legal-analytic and legal-historical method is applied to enable the purpose of investigation.
The Instrument of Government act and its protection of property has constantly evolved in favour of landowners. Restrictions to this fundamental right require a common public interest that justifies it, as well as a balance of proportionality. In cases of restrictions, the landowner is entitled to compensation in different extent depending on whether it is an expropriation or a disposal restriction. Everyone also has the right to use another's land through the right of public access.
The Swedish mineral legislation has its roots in the 13th century and strongly reflects upon the Swedish state's strong interest in mining operations, even though 700 years have passed. The principle of “first come, first served”, also known as the claim-system, remains steady and in force up to date. The person who first claims or shows interest in the exploration of possible resources of minerals in a certain area is the one who is granted exclusive rights to this area. This right can be granted even when landowners oppose such permits.
2
Despite the large environmental impact of mining activities, no further environmental tests are conducted to survey the consequences of the operations. This as a direct sequence of the legislator's interest not to burden the already financially expensive mining operations. Thus, two opposing common interests are weighed against each other, the economic interest against the environmental interest.
There is nothing to suggest that the design of the Swedish mineral act contradicts neither The Instrument of Government act nor ECHR. On the other hand, there is a potential for change. Which in best case possible would lead to an expanded environmental assessment and extended rights for landowners in the event of restrictions in their right of peaceful enjoyment of its possessions justified by the Swedish mineral act. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9010440
- author
- Riemer, Arvid LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20201
- year
- 2020
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- fastighetsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9010440
- date added to LUP
- 2020-09-17 13:41:42
- date last changed
- 2020-09-17 13:41:42
@misc{9010440,
abstract = {{The protection of property is a fundamental right that is regulated by both The Instrument of Government act and ECHR which establish every person's right to property. However, the regulation is not unconditionally guaranteed, restrictions can be made as a common public interest justifies it. One such common public interest is mining operations, which is regulated by the Swedish mineral act that justifies restrictions in every person's right to protection of property.
The thesis aims to analyse the legislature's balance between different opposing interests when the protection of the property is derogated by the Swedish mineral act. A legal-analytic and legal-historical method is applied to enable the purpose of investigation.
The Instrument of Government act and its protection of property has constantly evolved in favour of landowners. Restrictions to this fundamental right require a common public interest that justifies it, as well as a balance of proportionality. In cases of restrictions, the landowner is entitled to compensation in different extent depending on whether it is an expropriation or a disposal restriction. Everyone also has the right to use another's land through the right of public access.
The Swedish mineral legislation has its roots in the 13th century and strongly reflects upon the Swedish state's strong interest in mining operations, even though 700 years have passed. The principle of “first come, first served”, also known as the claim-system, remains steady and in force up to date. The person who first claims or shows interest in the exploration of possible resources of minerals in a certain area is the one who is granted exclusive rights to this area. This right can be granted even when landowners oppose such permits.
2
Despite the large environmental impact of mining activities, no further environmental tests are conducted to survey the consequences of the operations. This as a direct sequence of the legislator's interest not to burden the already financially expensive mining operations. Thus, two opposing common interests are weighed against each other, the economic interest against the environmental interest.
There is nothing to suggest that the design of the Swedish mineral act contradicts neither The Instrument of Government act nor ECHR. On the other hand, there is a potential for change. Which in best case possible would lead to an expanded environmental assessment and extended rights for landowners in the event of restrictions in their right of peaceful enjoyment of its possessions justified by the Swedish mineral act.}},
author = {{Riemer, Arvid}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Minerallagstiftningen - En undersökning av dess förhållande till egendomsskyddet och andra motstående intressen}},
year = {{2020}},
}