Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Förutsättningar för egentligt ansvarsgenombrott trots HDs (icke-existerande) praxis

Feldtblad, Hannah LU (2020) HARH13 20201
Department of Business Law
Abstract
In Swedish case law, there have been cases where a court has imposed a personal liability on shareholders, so-called piercing the corporate veil, despite the principle of the shareholders' limited liability for the company's obligations in the 1st Chapter 3 § of the Swedish Companies Act, without explicit support in law. Six years ago, the Supreme court had the opportunity to decide in the question of piercing the corporate veil in NJA 2014 s. 877, but announced a verdict difficult to interpret. In the doctrine, the case is commonly interpreted as denying the future use of piercing the corporate veil, as a rule in association law, and its existence in general. The Supreme court’s verdict falls under the heading “particularly qualified... (More)
In Swedish case law, there have been cases where a court has imposed a personal liability on shareholders, so-called piercing the corporate veil, despite the principle of the shareholders' limited liability for the company's obligations in the 1st Chapter 3 § of the Swedish Companies Act, without explicit support in law. Six years ago, the Supreme court had the opportunity to decide in the question of piercing the corporate veil in NJA 2014 s. 877, but announced a verdict difficult to interpret. In the doctrine, the case is commonly interpreted as denying the future use of piercing the corporate veil, as a rule in association law, and its existence in general. The Supreme court’s verdict falls under the heading “particularly qualified cases”, a concept undefined and launched by them, which must be considered to encompass the traditional discussion of piercing the corporate veil that the Supreme court in the verdict has distanced itself from. To the question of there after NJA 2014 s. 877 being preconditions for a Swedish court to breach the shareholder’s limited responsibility for the company’s obligations according to unwritten principles attributable to association law, an affirmative answer is given. The conclusion that the Supreme court has left the issue of piercing the corporate veil to be decided in the future is also derived. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
I svensk rättspraxis har förekommit fall där domstol har ålagt aktieägare personligt betalningsansvar, trots principen om aktieägares begränsade ansvar för bolagets förpliktelser i 1 kap. 3 § aktiebolagslagen (2005:551), utan uttryckligt stöd i lag. Det har till synes bildats en uppfattning i både praxis och doktrin som ger förklaringen att domstolen med en oskriven associationsrättslig regel kan motivera genombrott, trots att en sådan princip aldrig tillerkänts genom ett avgörande i högsta instans. HD fick för sex år sedan chansen att döma i frågan om ansvarsgenombrott för aktieägare på oskrivna associationsrättsliga grunder i NJA 2014 s. 877 men levererade en svårtydd dom. I doktrin tolkas domen vara nekande till framtida användning av... (More)
I svensk rättspraxis har förekommit fall där domstol har ålagt aktieägare personligt betalningsansvar, trots principen om aktieägares begränsade ansvar för bolagets förpliktelser i 1 kap. 3 § aktiebolagslagen (2005:551), utan uttryckligt stöd i lag. Det har till synes bildats en uppfattning i både praxis och doktrin som ger förklaringen att domstolen med en oskriven associationsrättslig regel kan motivera genombrott, trots att en sådan princip aldrig tillerkänts genom ett avgörande i högsta instans. HD fick för sex år sedan chansen att döma i frågan om ansvarsgenombrott för aktieägare på oskrivna associationsrättsliga grunder i NJA 2014 s. 877 men levererade en svårtydd dom. I doktrin tolkas domen vara nekande till framtida användning av principerna för ansvarsgenombrott och dess existens i övrigt. Efter domen har emellertid underrätterna fortsatt att vända sig till principerna om ansvarsgenombrott, trots HDs avståndstagande. HDs dom faller in under rubriken “särskilt kvalificerade fall”, ett av dem lanserat och odefinierat begrepp vilket måste anses rymma den traditionella diskussion som HD i domen tagit avstånd till. Till frågan om det efter NJA 2014 s. 877 finns förutsättningar för svensk domstol att döma till egentligt ansvarsgenombrott ges därför ett jakande svar. Slutsatsen att HD lämnat frågan till att avgöras i framtiden får också göras. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Feldtblad, Hannah LU
supervisor
organization
course
HARH13 20201
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Ansvarsgenombrott, NJA 2014 s. 877
language
Swedish
id
9018720
date added to LUP
2020-06-16 08:29:35
date last changed
2020-06-16 08:29:35
@misc{9018720,
  abstract     = {{In Swedish case law, there have been cases where a court has imposed a personal liability on shareholders, so-called piercing the corporate veil, despite the principle of the shareholders' limited liability for the company's obligations in the 1st Chapter 3 § of the Swedish Companies Act, without explicit support in law. Six years ago, the Supreme court had the opportunity to decide in the question of piercing the corporate veil in NJA 2014 s. 877, but announced a verdict difficult to interpret. In the doctrine, the case is commonly interpreted as denying the future use of piercing the corporate veil, as a rule in association law, and its existence in general. The Supreme court’s verdict falls under the heading “particularly qualified cases”, a concept undefined and launched by them, which must be considered to encompass the traditional discussion of piercing the corporate veil that the Supreme court in the verdict has distanced itself from. To the question of there after NJA 2014 s. 877 being preconditions for a Swedish court to breach the shareholder’s limited responsibility for the company’s obligations according to unwritten principles attributable to association law, an affirmative answer is given. The conclusion that the Supreme court has left the issue of piercing the corporate veil to be decided in the future is also derived.}},
  author       = {{Feldtblad, Hannah}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Förutsättningar för egentligt ansvarsgenombrott trots HDs (icke-existerande) praxis}},
  year         = {{2020}},
}