Från oklarhet till klarhet – Om oklarhetsregelns roll inom avtalsrätten
(2021) JURM02 20212Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Oklarhetsregeln är en avtalsrättslig princip som härstammar från den romerska rätten och återfinns i flera rättsordningar och internationella principsamlingar. I Corpus Juris Civilis är den latinska formuleringen av regeln ambiguitas contra stipulatorem est och på engelska omnämns den som the contra proferentem rule. Även om oklarhetsregeln är en välkänd princip, är den kontroversiell. HD har exempelvis skrivit att tillämpningsområdet för regeln är begränsat, vilket gjort att regelns plats i svensk rättsordning har ifrågasatts.
Syftet med uppsatsen är att definiera oklarhetsregeln och att undersöka om den fortfarande är en användbar avtalstolkningsregel. Uppsatsen är skriven utifrån ett begreppsanalytiskt perspektiv med stöd av den... (More) - Oklarhetsregeln är en avtalsrättslig princip som härstammar från den romerska rätten och återfinns i flera rättsordningar och internationella principsamlingar. I Corpus Juris Civilis är den latinska formuleringen av regeln ambiguitas contra stipulatorem est och på engelska omnämns den som the contra proferentem rule. Även om oklarhetsregeln är en välkänd princip, är den kontroversiell. HD har exempelvis skrivit att tillämpningsområdet för regeln är begränsat, vilket gjort att regelns plats i svensk rättsordning har ifrågasatts.
Syftet med uppsatsen är att definiera oklarhetsregeln och att undersöka om den fortfarande är en användbar avtalstolkningsregel. Uppsatsen är skriven utifrån ett begreppsanalytiskt perspektiv med stöd av den rättsdogmatiska metoden. Källorna består av svenska lagrum, förarbeten, svensk doktrin och praxis, samt av EU-gemensam rätt, internationella principsamlingar och utländsk doktrin.
Uppsatsen resulterar i att fem olika innebörder av termen oklarhetsregeln kan urskiljas: A) tolkning mot författaren av standardavtal, B) tolkning mot gäldenären, C) tolkning mot en starkare avtalspart, CA) tolkning mot näringsidkare som använder standardavtal i konsumentrelationer, och D) tolkning mot den som gynnas av ansvarsbegränsande klausuler. Dessa olika innebörder analyseras sedan utifrån fyra olika avtalsscenarion: 1) standardavtal, konsumentrelationer, 2) standardavtal, kommersiella parter, 3) förhandlade avtal, konsumentrelationer, och 4) förhandlade avtal, kommersiella parter. Underlaget visar att innebörd A är en subsidiär regel i förhållande till den subjektiva och objektiva tolkningen, att innebörd C och D behandlas inom ramen för den objektiva tolkningen samt att innebörd CA aktualiseras så snart EU-rättens klarhetskrav inte har uppnåtts.
Slutsatsen är att om oklarhetsregeln kan användas med någon av de identifierade innebörderna är den en användbar och förutsebar avtalstolkningsregel som hjälper parterna att överblicka vilka risker de tar när de ingår en avtalsrelation. Dessutom ger den domstolen en klar regel att använda när oklarhet råder. (Less) - Abstract
- The contra proferentem rule is a legal doctrine in contract law, which originates from the Roman law. Today, the rule is known in several legal systems and is used in international collections of principles. In Corpus Juris Civilis the Latin wording of the rule is ambiguitas contra stipulatorem est and in Sweden the rule is known as oklarhetsregeln. Even though the rule is well known, it is controversial. As an example, the Swedish Supreme Court has stated that the scope of the rule is limited. As a result, the use of this rule in Swedish contract law has been questioned.
The purpose of this thesis is to define the contra proferentem rule and to investigate if it is still a useful legal doctrine in contract law. The thesis is written... (More) - The contra proferentem rule is a legal doctrine in contract law, which originates from the Roman law. Today, the rule is known in several legal systems and is used in international collections of principles. In Corpus Juris Civilis the Latin wording of the rule is ambiguitas contra stipulatorem est and in Sweden the rule is known as oklarhetsregeln. Even though the rule is well known, it is controversial. As an example, the Swedish Supreme Court has stated that the scope of the rule is limited. As a result, the use of this rule in Swedish contract law has been questioned.
The purpose of this thesis is to define the contra proferentem rule and to investigate if it is still a useful legal doctrine in contract law. The thesis is written according to the legal dogmatic method and from a conceptual analysis perspective. The sources consist of Swedish, foreign and international sections of law, doctrine, court practice, and Swedish legislative history.
The thesis focuses on five different meanings of the Swedish word oklarhetsregeln: (A) interpreting against the author of standard contract terms, (B) interpreting against the debtor, (C) interpreting against the more powerful contracting party, (CA) interpreting against a company that is using standard contract terms in a consumer relation, and (D) interpreting against the party who benefits from a disclaimer clause. These meanings can then be examined in four different contractual scenarios: (1) standard contract terms, consumer relations, (2) standard contract terms, commercial relations, (3) negotiated contract terms, consumer relations, and (4) negotiated contract terms, commercial relations. The examination shows that meaning A is subsidiary compared to subjective or objective interpretation, meaning C and D are used within the objective interpretation, and meaning CA is used as soon as the level of clarity, set by the Court of Justice of the European Union, is not reached.
The conclusion is that if oklarhetsregeln is used in one of the presented meanings, it is a useful and predictable legal doctrine. The contribution of the rule is that it allows the contracting parties to take stock of the risks the agreement entails. In addition, it gives the court a distinct rule to use when a contract is ambiguous. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9070553
- author
- Kehlet, Sofie LU
- supervisor
-
- Ola Svensson LU
- organization
- alternative title
- The Contra Proferentem Rule in Contract Law
- course
- JURM02 20212
- year
- 2021
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Avtalsrätt, Civilrätt, EU-rätt, Förmögenhetsrätt, Oklarhetsregeln, Oklarhetsprincipen, Avtalsvillkorsdirektivet, Private law, EU law, Contra stipulatorem, Contra proferentem, The contra proferentem rule
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9070553
- date added to LUP
- 2022-01-29 14:20:28
- date last changed
- 2022-01-29 14:20:28
@misc{9070553,
abstract = {{The contra proferentem rule is a legal doctrine in contract law, which originates from the Roman law. Today, the rule is known in several legal systems and is used in international collections of principles. In Corpus Juris Civilis the Latin wording of the rule is ambiguitas contra stipulatorem est and in Sweden the rule is known as oklarhetsregeln. Even though the rule is well known, it is controversial. As an example, the Swedish Supreme Court has stated that the scope of the rule is limited. As a result, the use of this rule in Swedish contract law has been questioned.
The purpose of this thesis is to define the contra proferentem rule and to investigate if it is still a useful legal doctrine in contract law. The thesis is written according to the legal dogmatic method and from a conceptual analysis perspective. The sources consist of Swedish, foreign and international sections of law, doctrine, court practice, and Swedish legislative history.
The thesis focuses on five different meanings of the Swedish word oklarhetsregeln: (A) interpreting against the author of standard contract terms, (B) interpreting against the debtor, (C) interpreting against the more powerful contracting party, (CA) interpreting against a company that is using standard contract terms in a consumer relation, and (D) interpreting against the party who benefits from a disclaimer clause. These meanings can then be examined in four different contractual scenarios: (1) standard contract terms, consumer relations, (2) standard contract terms, commercial relations, (3) negotiated contract terms, consumer relations, and (4) negotiated contract terms, commercial relations. The examination shows that meaning A is subsidiary compared to subjective or objective interpretation, meaning C and D are used within the objective interpretation, and meaning CA is used as soon as the level of clarity, set by the Court of Justice of the European Union, is not reached.
The conclusion is that if oklarhetsregeln is used in one of the presented meanings, it is a useful and predictable legal doctrine. The contribution of the rule is that it allows the contracting parties to take stock of the risks the agreement entails. In addition, it gives the court a distinct rule to use when a contract is ambiguous.}},
author = {{Kehlet, Sofie}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Från oklarhet till klarhet – Om oklarhetsregelns roll inom avtalsrätten}},
year = {{2021}},
}