Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Verkan av No Oral Modification-klausuler i svensk och engelsk rätt

Tornerhjelm, Fredrik LU (2023) JURM02 20232
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
No oral modification-klausuler är en typ av boilerplate-klausul som är vanligt
förekommande i svenska och internationella avtal. De går att identifiera genom att de typiskt sätt begränsar avtalsparter från att göra ändringar i avtalet
på något annat sätt än skriftligt, även kallat ett skriftkrav. Ett exempel på en
NOM-klausul är: ”Alla ändringar av detta avtal måste göras skriftligen.”
Dessa klausuler regleras bland annat i Art 29(2) av Förenta Nationernas Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) som även
antagits som svensk lag i Lag (1987:822) om internationella köp. I konventionens Art 29(2) finner vi:
”Ett skriftligt avtal som innehåller en bestämmelse att en ändring eller ett
upphävande av avtalet... (More)
No oral modification-klausuler är en typ av boilerplate-klausul som är vanligt
förekommande i svenska och internationella avtal. De går att identifiera genom att de typiskt sätt begränsar avtalsparter från att göra ändringar i avtalet
på något annat sätt än skriftligt, även kallat ett skriftkrav. Ett exempel på en
NOM-klausul är: ”Alla ändringar av detta avtal måste göras skriftligen.”
Dessa klausuler regleras bland annat i Art 29(2) av Förenta Nationernas Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) som även
antagits som svensk lag i Lag (1987:822) om internationella köp. I konventionens Art 29(2) finner vi:
”Ett skriftligt avtal som innehåller en bestämmelse att en ändring eller ett
upphävande av avtalet måste ske genom skriftlig överenskommelse kan inte
ändras eller bringas att upphöra genom en överenskommelse på annat sätt.
En part kan emellertid genom sitt handlande förlora möjligheten att åberopa
en sådan bestämmelse i den mån den andra parten har förlitat sig på detta
handlande.”
Vad som följer av denna bestämmelse är således att klausuler av detta slag
bör upprätthållas, med undantaget att de kan förlora möjligheten att åberopa
en sådan klausul i den mån den andra parten har förlitat sig på detta handlande. Uppsatsen kommer gå över varför detta inte riktigt stämmer, och vilka
principer som aktualiseras när en sådan klausul skall tolkas i en avtalsrättslig
tvist. Principen om lojalitet, eller lojalitetsprincipen, samt principen om avtalsfrihet påverkar båda hur domstolen kan upprätthålla NOM-klausuler.
Utöver att se på den svenska rätten kommer jag även att kolla på den engelska
rätten, common law, för att se hur de går till väga när de tolkar dessa principer
samt varför tillämpningen skiljer sig så kraftigt åt. (Less)
Abstract
No oral modification clauses are a type of boilerplate clause commonly found
in Swedish and international contracts. They can be identified by the fact that
they typically restrict contracting parties from making changes to the contract
in any way other than in writing, also known as a writing requirement. An
example of a NOM clause is: "All changes to this contract must be made in
writing."
These clauses are regulated in, amongst other places, Art 29(2) of the United
Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG),
which has also been adopted as Swedish law in Lag (1987:822) om internationella köp. In Article 29(2) of the Convention, we find:
" A contract in writing which contains a provision requiring... (More)
No oral modification clauses are a type of boilerplate clause commonly found
in Swedish and international contracts. They can be identified by the fact that
they typically restrict contracting parties from making changes to the contract
in any way other than in writing, also known as a writing requirement. An
example of a NOM clause is: "All changes to this contract must be made in
writing."
These clauses are regulated in, amongst other places, Art 29(2) of the United
Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG),
which has also been adopted as Swedish law in Lag (1987:822) om internationella köp. In Article 29(2) of the Convention, we find:
" A contract in writing which contains a provision requiring any modification
or termination by agreement to be in writing may not be otherwise modified
or terminated by agreement. However, a party may be precluded by his conduct from asserting such a provision to the extent that the other party has
relied on that conduct.."
What follows from this provision is thus that such clauses should be upheld,
with the exception that they may lose the possibility of invoking such a clause
to the extent that the other party has relied on this conduct. The paper will
consider why this is not quite true, and what principles are involved in interpreting such a clause in a contractual dispute. The principle of loyalty and the
principle of freedom of contract both affect how the court can enforce NOM
clauses.
In addition to looking at Swedish law, I will also look at English common law
to see how they interpret these principles and why their application differs so
much. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Tornerhjelm, Fredrik LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Effect of No Oral Modification clauses in Swedish and English law
course
JURM02 20232
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Avtalsrätt
language
Swedish
id
9143264
date added to LUP
2024-01-24 12:36:19
date last changed
2024-01-24 12:36:19
@misc{9143264,
  abstract     = {{No oral modification clauses are a type of boilerplate clause commonly found
in Swedish and international contracts. They can be identified by the fact that
they typically restrict contracting parties from making changes to the contract
in any way other than in writing, also known as a writing requirement. An
example of a NOM clause is: "All changes to this contract must be made in
writing."
These clauses are regulated in, amongst other places, Art 29(2) of the United
Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG),
which has also been adopted as Swedish law in Lag (1987:822) om internationella köp. In Article 29(2) of the Convention, we find:
" A contract in writing which contains a provision requiring any modification
or termination by agreement to be in writing may not be otherwise modified
or terminated by agreement. However, a party may be precluded by his conduct from asserting such a provision to the extent that the other party has
relied on that conduct.."
What follows from this provision is thus that such clauses should be upheld,
with the exception that they may lose the possibility of invoking such a clause
to the extent that the other party has relied on this conduct. The paper will
consider why this is not quite true, and what principles are involved in interpreting such a clause in a contractual dispute. The principle of loyalty and the
principle of freedom of contract both affect how the court can enforce NOM
clauses.
In addition to looking at Swedish law, I will also look at English common law
to see how they interpret these principles and why their application differs so
much.}},
  author       = {{Tornerhjelm, Fredrik}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Verkan av No Oral Modification-klausuler i svensk och engelsk rätt}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}