Minimumregeln i praxis - Om Högsta domstolens användning av minimumregeln vid avtalstolkning
(2024) JURM02 20241Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- När domstolar ska tolka ett avtal och ett tolkningsalternativ inte kan väljas utifrån subjektiv- och objektiv tolkning finns det generella tolkningsregler el-ler prioritetsregler att tillämpa för att fastställa avtalsinnehållet. Huvudsakli-gen finns det två sådana som kan tillämpas, oklarhetsregeln och minimumre-geln. Oklarhetsregeln innebär att avtalet tolkas mot den som bär ansvaret för oklarheten eller har formulerat villkoret. Minimumregeln, som är det huvud-sakliga föremålet för denna uppsats, innebär att avtalet ges den för den för-pliktigade minst långtgående tolkningen. Minimumregeln som prioritetsregel vid avtalstolkning är omdebatterad och det råder delade meningar kring om och i så fall hur den tillämpas i tolkningstvister.
... (More) - När domstolar ska tolka ett avtal och ett tolkningsalternativ inte kan väljas utifrån subjektiv- och objektiv tolkning finns det generella tolkningsregler el-ler prioritetsregler att tillämpa för att fastställa avtalsinnehållet. Huvudsakli-gen finns det två sådana som kan tillämpas, oklarhetsregeln och minimumre-geln. Oklarhetsregeln innebär att avtalet tolkas mot den som bär ansvaret för oklarheten eller har formulerat villkoret. Minimumregeln, som är det huvud-sakliga föremålet för denna uppsats, innebär att avtalet ges den för den för-pliktigade minst långtgående tolkningen. Minimumregeln som prioritetsregel vid avtalstolkning är omdebatterad och det råder delade meningar kring om och i så fall hur den tillämpas i tolkningstvister.
Uppsatsens syfte är att genom rättsdogmatisk metod undersöka om och hur Högsta domstolen kan anses uttrycka minimumregeln för att försöka belysa om regeln tillämpas i praxis och visa vilka problem som uppstår vid försök att utläsa regeln. Urvalet av rättsfall sker främst genom vilka rättsfall som i doktrinen ansetts uttrycka minimumregeln eller där doktrinen är tveksam till om minimumregeln använts. I framställningen redogörs för de rättsfall jag bedömer relevanta i förhållande till minimumregeln och vad doktrinen uttalat om rättsfallen i förhållande till min läsning av dem. Källorna består främst av praxis, litteratur och tidskriftsartiklar.
Uppsatsen visar att det uppstår flera svårigheter vid försök att utläsa mini-mumregeln ur Högsta domstolens praxis. Ett första problem är att avgöra om det är en objektiv tolkning eller en prioritetsregel som lett till den av domsto-len valda tolkningen. Till detta hör också att även om domskälen antyder att någon prioritetsregel tillämpats kan utgången i målen ofta förklaras med rim-lighets- och förnuftsöverväganden inom den objektiva tolkningen. Ett andra problem är att avgöra vilken prioritetsregel som tillämpats och då även om oklarhets- eller minimumregeln har tillämpats tillsammans eller som förstär-kande av varandra. Ytterligare något uppsatsen visar är att det i samtliga fall där borgensåtaganden tolkats är det möjligt att hävda att minimumregeln an-vänts.
Det finns alltså flera möjliga sätt att förstå domstolens resonemang i förhål-lande till minimumregeln. Trots att det inte går att säkert säga att minimum-regeln tillämpas i Högsta domstolens praxis menar jag att det ändå är me-ningsfullt att tala om den som en prioritetsregel för att synliggöra de övervä-ganden som ligger bakom den och som, oavsett hur man läser resonemangen i tolkningsfrågan i domarna, verkar ligga bakom utfallet i målen som under-sökts. Vidare ger det avtalsparter förutsebarhet genom medvetenhet om att minimumregeln kan användas för att tolka avtal om de inte tydligt reglerar sina mellanhavanden. (Less) - Abstract
- When courts fail to choose an appropriate interpretation of a contract based on subjective and objective methods of interpretation, there are general rules of interpretation or priority which can be applied to determine a satisfactory meaning of the contract. Essentially, there are two such rules available. Ac-cording to the contra proferentem rule, the contract or clause is to be inter-preted against the party who is responsible for the ambiguity or the party who stipulated it. The minimum rule, which is the main subject of this thesis, en-tails choosing the least extensive interpretation for the obliged party. The use of the minimum rule in contract interpretation is debated, and there are dif-ferent opinions regarding its application... (More)
- When courts fail to choose an appropriate interpretation of a contract based on subjective and objective methods of interpretation, there are general rules of interpretation or priority which can be applied to determine a satisfactory meaning of the contract. Essentially, there are two such rules available. Ac-cording to the contra proferentem rule, the contract or clause is to be inter-preted against the party who is responsible for the ambiguity or the party who stipulated it. The minimum rule, which is the main subject of this thesis, en-tails choosing the least extensive interpretation for the obliged party. The use of the minimum rule in contract interpretation is debated, and there are dif-ferent opinions regarding its application when interpreting contracts.
The purpose of the thesis is to, through the legal dogmatic method, investigate whether and how the Swedish Supreme Court can be considered to express usage of the minimum rule in order to try and shed light on whether the rule is used in practice and to provide insight into what issues arise when attempt-ing to discern its use. The selection of cases is mainly based on which cases that Swedish legal doctrine considers to be examples of the minimum rule or examples of where the legal doctrine is uncertain to whether the minimum rule has been applied or not. In the thesis I examine the legal cases I consider relevant in relation to the minimum rule as well as what doctrine says in rela-tion to my analysis. The sources mainly consist of case law, literature, and journal articles.
The thesis demonstrates that several difficulties arise when attempting to dis-cern the minimum rule from the Swedish Supreme Court's practice. A first issue is determining if the court's interpretation is the result of an objective interpretation or of a priority rule. This issue also includes that even if the court's reasoning allows for arguing that a priority rule has been used, the outcomes might also be explained by considerations of general arguments of reason and common sense within the scope of objective interpretation. A sec-ond issue is the determination of which priority rule might have been used, and also whether the contra proferentem rule and the minimum rule may have been regarded together, or as reinforcing each other. Additionally, the thesis shows that in all analysed cases regarding the interpretation of guarantee lia-bility it is possible to argue that the minimum rule has been used.
Thus, there are multiple ways to understand the court's reasoning in relation to the minimum rule. Even though it cannot be said conclusively that the Swe-dish Supreme Court applies the minimum rule in practice, I consider it useful to speak of it as a priority rule in order to highlight the considerations behind it which, regardless of how the court's reasoning is interpreted, seem to be an underlying consideration in the outcomes of the examined cases. Furthermore it provides contractual parties a degree of predictability regarding that the minimum rule might be used if they do not clearly regulate their interactions. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9152219
- author
- Gyllenspetz Munro, William LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- The minimum rule in practice - On the Supreme Court's use of the minimum rule when interpreting contracts
- course
- JURM02 20241
- year
- 2024
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- avtalsrätt, avtalstolkning, oklarhetsregeln, minimumregeln, minimiregeln
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9152219
- date added to LUP
- 2024-06-10 16:30:27
- date last changed
- 2024-06-10 16:30:27
@misc{9152219,
abstract = {{When courts fail to choose an appropriate interpretation of a contract based on subjective and objective methods of interpretation, there are general rules of interpretation or priority which can be applied to determine a satisfactory meaning of the contract. Essentially, there are two such rules available. Ac-cording to the contra proferentem rule, the contract or clause is to be inter-preted against the party who is responsible for the ambiguity or the party who stipulated it. The minimum rule, which is the main subject of this thesis, en-tails choosing the least extensive interpretation for the obliged party. The use of the minimum rule in contract interpretation is debated, and there are dif-ferent opinions regarding its application when interpreting contracts.
The purpose of the thesis is to, through the legal dogmatic method, investigate whether and how the Swedish Supreme Court can be considered to express usage of the minimum rule in order to try and shed light on whether the rule is used in practice and to provide insight into what issues arise when attempt-ing to discern its use. The selection of cases is mainly based on which cases that Swedish legal doctrine considers to be examples of the minimum rule or examples of where the legal doctrine is uncertain to whether the minimum rule has been applied or not. In the thesis I examine the legal cases I consider relevant in relation to the minimum rule as well as what doctrine says in rela-tion to my analysis. The sources mainly consist of case law, literature, and journal articles.
The thesis demonstrates that several difficulties arise when attempting to dis-cern the minimum rule from the Swedish Supreme Court's practice. A first issue is determining if the court's interpretation is the result of an objective interpretation or of a priority rule. This issue also includes that even if the court's reasoning allows for arguing that a priority rule has been used, the outcomes might also be explained by considerations of general arguments of reason and common sense within the scope of objective interpretation. A sec-ond issue is the determination of which priority rule might have been used, and also whether the contra proferentem rule and the minimum rule may have been regarded together, or as reinforcing each other. Additionally, the thesis shows that in all analysed cases regarding the interpretation of guarantee lia-bility it is possible to argue that the minimum rule has been used.
Thus, there are multiple ways to understand the court's reasoning in relation to the minimum rule. Even though it cannot be said conclusively that the Swe-dish Supreme Court applies the minimum rule in practice, I consider it useful to speak of it as a priority rule in order to highlight the considerations behind it which, regardless of how the court's reasoning is interpreted, seem to be an underlying consideration in the outcomes of the examined cases. Furthermore it provides contractual parties a degree of predictability regarding that the minimum rule might be used if they do not clearly regulate their interactions.}},
author = {{Gyllenspetz Munro, William}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Minimumregeln i praxis - Om Högsta domstolens användning av minimumregeln vid avtalstolkning}},
year = {{2024}},
}