Förutsättningsläran - en komparativ studie av svensk och dansk rätt
(2023) JURM02 20232Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Förutsättningsläran är en gammal rättsprincip som härstammar från romersk rätt och fick en renässans under 1800-talet i Tyskland. Tidigt 1900-tal fick förutsättningsläran fotfäste i Danmark när Henry Ussing avhandlade princi-pen med en modern syn på läran, denna nya objektiva förutsättningslära spred sig sedan till Sverige.
Läran innebär att ett avtal kan ogiltigförklaras om en avtalspart haft en vä-sentlig förutsättning som brustit vilket gjort att syftet med avtalet förfelats såtillvida att parten inte hade ingått avtalet, åtminstone inte på samma vill-kor, om han vetat om de rätta omständigheterna. Det krävs också att detta har varit synbart för motparten, samt att det är lämpligt och rimligt att risken för den bristande... (More) - Förutsättningsläran är en gammal rättsprincip som härstammar från romersk rätt och fick en renässans under 1800-talet i Tyskland. Tidigt 1900-tal fick förutsättningsläran fotfäste i Danmark när Henry Ussing avhandlade princi-pen med en modern syn på läran, denna nya objektiva förutsättningslära spred sig sedan till Sverige.
Läran innebär att ett avtal kan ogiltigförklaras om en avtalspart haft en vä-sentlig förutsättning som brustit vilket gjort att syftet med avtalet förfelats såtillvida att parten inte hade ingått avtalet, åtminstone inte på samma vill-kor, om han vetat om de rätta omständigheterna. Det krävs också att detta har varit synbart för motparten, samt att det är lämpligt och rimligt att risken för den bristande förutsättningen läggs på motparten.
Denna uppsats utreder förutsättningslärans rättsliga utveckling i Sverige och Danmark, samt gör en komparativ analys mellan länderna och ser om det finns lärdomar vi kan ta från vårt grannland. Danmark är av särskilt intresse eftersom vi har en likadan avtalslag som dem sen det nordiska samarbetet, samt då läran först spred sig i Danmark.
Förutsättningslärans rättsliga grunder och rekvisit är lika mellan länderna. I Danmark har emellertid förutsättningsläran haft större genomslag än i Sve-rige med fler mål som avgörs och en större benägenhet hos danska domstolar att tillämpa läran. I Sverige anses läran vara subsidiär till alla andra ogiltig-hetsregler, vilket inte är fallet i Danmark. Detta har gjort att förutsättningslä-ran knappt har tillämpats de senaste 20 åren för svenskt vidkommande. Danska HD har även öppnat upp för möjligheten att jämka avtal i skärpande riktning med stöd av förutsättningsläran, något som aldrig ansetts vara möj-ligt i svensk doktrin.
En lärdom från dansk rätt är att det verkar fungera väl att tillämpa förutsätt-ningsläran och 36§ avtalslagen kombinerat. En annan lärdom är att man i dansk domstol använt jämbördig-argument i diskussioner kring riskrekvisitet i förutsättningsläran likt övervägandena i 36§ avtalslagen, detta är något som man skulle kunna beakta även i Sverige. (Less) - Abstract
- The doctrine of assumptions is an old legal principle that originated in Ro-man law and enjoyed a renaissance in the 19th century in Germany. In the early 20th century, the doctrine of assumptions gained a foothold in Den-mark when Henry Ussing discussed the principle with a modern view of the doctrine, this new objective doctrine of assumptions then spread to Sweden.
The doctrine means that a contract can be annulled if a party to the contract has had an essential condition that has failed, which means that the purpose of the contract has been defeated to the extent that the party would not have entered into the contract, atleast not on the same terms, if he had known about the correct circumstances. It is also required that this has... (More) - The doctrine of assumptions is an old legal principle that originated in Ro-man law and enjoyed a renaissance in the 19th century in Germany. In the early 20th century, the doctrine of assumptions gained a foothold in Den-mark when Henry Ussing discussed the principle with a modern view of the doctrine, this new objective doctrine of assumptions then spread to Sweden.
The doctrine means that a contract can be annulled if a party to the contract has had an essential condition that has failed, which means that the purpose of the contract has been defeated to the extent that the party would not have entered into the contract, atleast not on the same terms, if he had known about the correct circumstances. It is also required that this has been apparent to the other party, and that it is appropriate and reasonable to place the risk of the breach on the other party.
This paper examines the legal development of the doctrine of assumptions in Sweden and Denmark, and makes a comparative analysis between the countries to see if there are lessons we can learn from our neighboring country. Denmark is of particular interest because we have a similar contract law as them since the Nordic cooperation, and because the doctrine first spread in Denmark.
The legal bases and requirements of the doctrine of assumptions are similar between the countries. In Denmark, however, the doctrine has had a greater impact than in Sweden, with more cases being decided and a greater wil-lingness of Danish courts to apply the doctrine. In Sweden, the doctrine is considered subsidiary to all other invalidity rules, which is not the case in Denmark. As a result, the doctrine of assumptions has hardly been applied in Sweden in the last 20 years. The Danish Supreme Court has also opened up the possibility of adjusting contracts in a stricter direction with the support of the doctrine of assumptions, something that has never been considered possible in Swedish doctrine.
One lesson from Danish law is that it seems to work well to apply the doctrine of assumptions and section 36 of the Contracts Act in combination. Another lesson is that the Danish courts have used equivalent arguments in discussions about the risk requirement in the doctrine of assumptions, similar to the considerations in section 36 of the Contracts Act, and this is so-mething that could also be considered in Sweden. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9142627
- author
- Broström-Snäll Kalayjian, Daniel LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- The doctrine of assumptions - a comparative study of Swedish and Danish law
- course
- JURM02 20232
- year
- 2023
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- förmögenhetsrätt, förutsättningsläran, allmän avtalsrätt, komparativ, dansk rätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9142627
- date added to LUP
- 2024-01-20 13:41:14
- date last changed
- 2024-01-20 13:41:14
@misc{9142627,
abstract = {{The doctrine of assumptions is an old legal principle that originated in Ro-man law and enjoyed a renaissance in the 19th century in Germany. In the early 20th century, the doctrine of assumptions gained a foothold in Den-mark when Henry Ussing discussed the principle with a modern view of the doctrine, this new objective doctrine of assumptions then spread to Sweden.
The doctrine means that a contract can be annulled if a party to the contract has had an essential condition that has failed, which means that the purpose of the contract has been defeated to the extent that the party would not have entered into the contract, atleast not on the same terms, if he had known about the correct circumstances. It is also required that this has been apparent to the other party, and that it is appropriate and reasonable to place the risk of the breach on the other party.
This paper examines the legal development of the doctrine of assumptions in Sweden and Denmark, and makes a comparative analysis between the countries to see if there are lessons we can learn from our neighboring country. Denmark is of particular interest because we have a similar contract law as them since the Nordic cooperation, and because the doctrine first spread in Denmark.
The legal bases and requirements of the doctrine of assumptions are similar between the countries. In Denmark, however, the doctrine has had a greater impact than in Sweden, with more cases being decided and a greater wil-lingness of Danish courts to apply the doctrine. In Sweden, the doctrine is considered subsidiary to all other invalidity rules, which is not the case in Denmark. As a result, the doctrine of assumptions has hardly been applied in Sweden in the last 20 years. The Danish Supreme Court has also opened up the possibility of adjusting contracts in a stricter direction with the support of the doctrine of assumptions, something that has never been considered possible in Swedish doctrine.
One lesson from Danish law is that it seems to work well to apply the doctrine of assumptions and section 36 of the Contracts Act in combination. Another lesson is that the Danish courts have used equivalent arguments in discussions about the risk requirement in the doctrine of assumptions, similar to the considerations in section 36 of the Contracts Act, and this is so-mething that could also be considered in Sweden.}},
author = {{Broström-Snäll Kalayjian, Daniel}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Förutsättningsläran - en komparativ studie av svensk och dansk rätt}},
year = {{2023}},
}