Fråga om eventuella framtida fordringar uppkomna ur avtalsgrundade garantiutfästelser är föremål för preklusion
(2021) LAGF03 20212Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Uppsatsen tar sikte på en mycket specifik situation nämligen huruvida eventuella framtida fordringar som är uppkomna ur avtalsgrundade garantiutfästelser är föremål för preklusionsbestämmelsen i 6 § lagen (1981:131) om kallelse på okända borgenärer (”Kallelselagen”).
Utredningen har visat att preklusionsbestämmelsen i Kallelselagen ytterst är en avvägning mellan olika intressen som mycket vitt skiljer sig åt. Å ena sidan finns ett avvecklings- och aktieägarintresset och å andra sidan finns ett borgenärsintresse. Om man anser att en eventuell framtida fordran kan prekluderas innebär detta framför allt ett främjande av avvecklings- och aktieägarintresset. Om man däremot anser att en sådan fordran inte kan prekluderas främjas framför allt... (More) - Uppsatsen tar sikte på en mycket specifik situation nämligen huruvida eventuella framtida fordringar som är uppkomna ur avtalsgrundade garantiutfästelser är föremål för preklusionsbestämmelsen i 6 § lagen (1981:131) om kallelse på okända borgenärer (”Kallelselagen”).
Utredningen har visat att preklusionsbestämmelsen i Kallelselagen ytterst är en avvägning mellan olika intressen som mycket vitt skiljer sig åt. Å ena sidan finns ett avvecklings- och aktieägarintresset och å andra sidan finns ett borgenärsintresse. Om man anser att en eventuell framtida fordran kan prekluderas innebär detta framför allt ett främjande av avvecklings- och aktieägarintresset. Om man däremot anser att en sådan fordran inte kan prekluderas främjas framför allt borgenärsintresset.
En fordran som har sin grund i ett miljöansvar enligt 10 kap. MB aktualiserar även andra viktiga och grundläggande värden, såsom samhälls-och miljöaspekter.
En likvidators uppdrag att skifta bolagets tillgångar och upplösa bolaget påverkas också av frågan om eventuella framtida fordringar ska kunna prekluderas eller om likvidatorn måste ta hänsyn till sådana fordringar.
I tillägg till detta uppstår även problem i hur en eventuell framtida fordran ska beräknas, för det fall beloppet inte har, eller kan, fastställas på förhand.
Vid en sammanvägning av olika intressen och argument anser författaren till denna uppsats att eventuella framtida fordringar som uppkommer ur garantiutfästelser enligt avtal bör kunna prekluderas (med särskilda undantag). En annan ordning skulle leda till stor osäkerhet och motverka förutsebarhet. En annan sak är att parterna till ett avtal redan vid avtalsingåendet har möjlighet att utforma avtalet på så sätt att man eliminerar eller i vart fall minimerar risken att den ena parten, vid den andra partens likvidation, inte har erforderligt skydd.
HD har i flera avgöranden ansett att vissa typer av fordringar omfattas av preklusionsbestämmelsen i Kallelselagen och att de därför kan prekluderas. HD har i ett fall ansett att det finns skäl att inte prekludera en fordran men att det bör ankomma på lagstiftaren att ta ställning till frågan och ansåg därför att fordran i målet skulle prekluderas. Det rörde sig då om en fordran som hade sin grund i miljölagstiftningen. (Less) - Abstract
- This bachelor’s thesis aims at a very specific situation, namely whether any future claims arising from contractual guarantee commitments are subject to the preclusion provision (Sw. preklusionsbestämmelsen) in section 6 of the Notice to Unknown Creditors Act (1981: 131) (the "Notice Act").
The study of the issue herein has shown that the preclusion provision in the Notice Act ultimately is a balance between different interests that widely differ from each other. On the one hand there is the interest of liquidation and of the shareholders and on the other hand there is the interest of the creditor. If it is to be considered that a possible future claim can be precluded, that would mainly lead to the promotion of the liquidation interest... (More) - This bachelor’s thesis aims at a very specific situation, namely whether any future claims arising from contractual guarantee commitments are subject to the preclusion provision (Sw. preklusionsbestämmelsen) in section 6 of the Notice to Unknown Creditors Act (1981: 131) (the "Notice Act").
The study of the issue herein has shown that the preclusion provision in the Notice Act ultimately is a balance between different interests that widely differ from each other. On the one hand there is the interest of liquidation and of the shareholders and on the other hand there is the interest of the creditor. If it is to be considered that a possible future claim can be precluded, that would mainly lead to the promotion of the liquidation interest and shareholder interest. If, however, it is considered that such a claim cannot be precluded, the creditor interest is particularly promoted.
A claim that is based on an environmental liability according to chapter 10 of the Swedish Environmental Code highlights other important and fundamental values, such as societal and environmental aspects.
Furthermore, a liquidator's assignment to divide the company's assets and to dissolve the company is also affected by the question of whether any possible future claims can be precluded or whether the liquidator must take such claims into account.
I addition, further issue arise in how a potential future claim should be valued, in the event that the amount was not, or could not, be decided in advance.
Taking different interests and arguments into account, the author of this bachelor’s thesis has found that any future claims that arise from contractual guarantee commitments should be precluded (with some reservations). Any other arrangement would lead to great uncertainty and would counteract predictability. Furthermore, at the time of the composing of the agreement, the contractual parties have the opportunity themselves to phrase the agreement in such a way that the agreement eliminates (or at least minimizes) the risk that one party, in the event of the other party entering into liquidation, does not have the necessary protection.
The Swedish Supreme Court has in several rulings found that certain types of claims are covered by the preclusion provision in the Notice Act and therefore that they can be precluded. The Swedish Supreme Court has in one case found that there is reason not to preclude a claim but that it should be up to the legislator to take position on the issue and the Supreme Court therefore found that the claim in that particular case should be considered precluded. The issue at hand was based on a claim that had its cause in environmental legislation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9070171
- author
- Anstrin, Isabell LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20212
- year
- 2021
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- associationsrätt, avtalsrätt, fordringsrätt, preklusion, garantier
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9070171
- date added to LUP
- 2022-02-15 11:28:59
- date last changed
- 2022-02-15 11:28:59
@misc{9070171,
abstract = {{This bachelor’s thesis aims at a very specific situation, namely whether any future claims arising from contractual guarantee commitments are subject to the preclusion provision (Sw. preklusionsbestämmelsen) in section 6 of the Notice to Unknown Creditors Act (1981: 131) (the "Notice Act").
The study of the issue herein has shown that the preclusion provision in the Notice Act ultimately is a balance between different interests that widely differ from each other. On the one hand there is the interest of liquidation and of the shareholders and on the other hand there is the interest of the creditor. If it is to be considered that a possible future claim can be precluded, that would mainly lead to the promotion of the liquidation interest and shareholder interest. If, however, it is considered that such a claim cannot be precluded, the creditor interest is particularly promoted.
A claim that is based on an environmental liability according to chapter 10 of the Swedish Environmental Code highlights other important and fundamental values, such as societal and environmental aspects.
Furthermore, a liquidator's assignment to divide the company's assets and to dissolve the company is also affected by the question of whether any possible future claims can be precluded or whether the liquidator must take such claims into account.
I addition, further issue arise in how a potential future claim should be valued, in the event that the amount was not, or could not, be decided in advance.
Taking different interests and arguments into account, the author of this bachelor’s thesis has found that any future claims that arise from contractual guarantee commitments should be precluded (with some reservations). Any other arrangement would lead to great uncertainty and would counteract predictability. Furthermore, at the time of the composing of the agreement, the contractual parties have the opportunity themselves to phrase the agreement in such a way that the agreement eliminates (or at least minimizes) the risk that one party, in the event of the other party entering into liquidation, does not have the necessary protection.
The Swedish Supreme Court has in several rulings found that certain types of claims are covered by the preclusion provision in the Notice Act and therefore that they can be precluded. The Swedish Supreme Court has in one case found that there is reason not to preclude a claim but that it should be up to the legislator to take position on the issue and the Supreme Court therefore found that the claim in that particular case should be considered precluded. The issue at hand was based on a claim that had its cause in environmental legislation.}},
author = {{Anstrin, Isabell}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Fråga om eventuella framtida fordringar uppkomna ur avtalsgrundade garantiutfästelser är föremål för preklusion}},
year = {{2021}},
}