En skada eller inte en skada? - En rättslig analys av HD:s avgörande i PFAS-målet
(2024) LAGF03 20241Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- This thesis examines the ruling by the Swedish Supreme Court on December 5, 2023 (T 486-23). The case, which has received a lot of attention in Swedish media, was about people who had an increased risk of catching diseases and other negative health effects because of a PFAS contamination. The question, which the Supreme Court had to decide upon, was whether risks themselves can constitute a reimbursable personal injury. The ruling is very interesting because this issue has never been tried before and the outcome can have an important impact on Swedish tort law.
The purpose of this essay is to investigate how the Supreme Court’s ruling should be interpreted and to examine whether the ruling is compatible with the two main functions of... (More) - This thesis examines the ruling by the Swedish Supreme Court on December 5, 2023 (T 486-23). The case, which has received a lot of attention in Swedish media, was about people who had an increased risk of catching diseases and other negative health effects because of a PFAS contamination. The question, which the Supreme Court had to decide upon, was whether risks themselves can constitute a reimbursable personal injury. The ruling is very interesting because this issue has never been tried before and the outcome can have an important impact on Swedish tort law.
The purpose of this essay is to investigate how the Supreme Court’s ruling should be interpreted and to examine whether the ruling is compatible with the two main functions of tort law. The study also examines to what extent the ruling can be applied to property damages. Hopefully this essay can also give rise to further discussions regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling and to what extent Swedish tort law should be dependent on risk assessments.
This thesis states that there are strong reasons to believe that the Court’s ruling means that the concept of a personal injury in tort law has been extended. Nowadays, even significant risks for such injuries should entitle to compensation. In addition, the essay emphasizes that the ruling should be applicable on property damages.
Lastly, this study also discusses if the Court’s ruling is compatible with the two main functions of tort law, namely reparation and prevention. The extended concept of a personal injury means that compensation will be paid even though no damage has occurred. This is not compatible with the reparative function. There are, furthermore, uncertainties about whether the ruling is compatible with the preventive function. However, the wording of the Court’s ruling indicates that the risk assessment must be restrictive, which in turn would mean that the outcome is compatible with the preventive function. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Denna studie behandlar Högsta domstolens avgörande den 5 december 2023 i det uppmärksammade PFAS-målet. Fallet handlade om personer som fick en förhöjd risk att drabbas av sjukdomar och negativa hälsoeffekter till följd av en PFAS-exponering. Frågan om risker i sig själva kunde utgöra en ersättningsgill personskada togs därmed upp till prövning. Domen är viktig för skadeståndsrätten ur ett rättsutvecklande perspektiv eftersom denna fråga aldrig har prövats tidigare.
Syftet med denna uppsats är att utreda hur domstolens ställningstagande ska tolkas samt om avgörandet är förenligt med skadeståndsrättens två huvudsakliga funktioner. Studien undersöker även om avgörandet kan tillämpas på sakskador. Förhoppningsvis kan denna studie ge... (More) - Denna studie behandlar Högsta domstolens avgörande den 5 december 2023 i det uppmärksammade PFAS-målet. Fallet handlade om personer som fick en förhöjd risk att drabbas av sjukdomar och negativa hälsoeffekter till följd av en PFAS-exponering. Frågan om risker i sig själva kunde utgöra en ersättningsgill personskada togs därmed upp till prövning. Domen är viktig för skadeståndsrätten ur ett rättsutvecklande perspektiv eftersom denna fråga aldrig har prövats tidigare.
Syftet med denna uppsats är att utreda hur domstolens ställningstagande ska tolkas samt om avgörandet är förenligt med skadeståndsrättens två huvudsakliga funktioner. Studien undersöker även om avgörandet kan tillämpas på sakskador. Förhoppningsvis kan denna studie ge upphov till vidare diskussioner beträffande HD:s avgörande samt hur skadeståndsrätten bör förhålla sig till förhöjda risker.
Studien konstaterar att det finns starka skäl som talar för att HD:s avgörande innebär en utvidgning av det skadeståndsrättsliga personskadebegreppet. Numera bör även beaktansvärda risker för framtida personskador berättiga till ersättning. Dessutom framhåller uppsatsen att domen bör kunna tillämpas på sakskador.
Studien resonerar slutligen kring avgörandets förenlighet med skadeståndsrättens två huvudsakliga funktioner, reparation och prevention. Utvidgningen medför att ersättning kommer att utgå fastän ingen skada har uppstått, vilket strider mot den reparativa funktionen. Vidare finns det oklarheter kring om utvidgningen är förenlig med den preventiva funktionen. Ordalydelsen av HD:s dom indikerar emellertid att riskbedömningen ska vara restriktiv, vilket i sin tur borde innebära att utgången är förenlig med den preventiva funktionen. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9153025
- author
- Aldén, Sara LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20241
- year
- 2024
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Skadeståndsrätt, PFAS
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9153025
- date added to LUP
- 2024-06-26 11:33:04
- date last changed
- 2024-06-26 11:33:04
@misc{9153025,
abstract = {{This thesis examines the ruling by the Swedish Supreme Court on December 5, 2023 (T 486-23). The case, which has received a lot of attention in Swedish media, was about people who had an increased risk of catching diseases and other negative health effects because of a PFAS contamination. The question, which the Supreme Court had to decide upon, was whether risks themselves can constitute a reimbursable personal injury. The ruling is very interesting because this issue has never been tried before and the outcome can have an important impact on Swedish tort law.
The purpose of this essay is to investigate how the Supreme Court’s ruling should be interpreted and to examine whether the ruling is compatible with the two main functions of tort law. The study also examines to what extent the ruling can be applied to property damages. Hopefully this essay can also give rise to further discussions regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling and to what extent Swedish tort law should be dependent on risk assessments.
This thesis states that there are strong reasons to believe that the Court’s ruling means that the concept of a personal injury in tort law has been extended. Nowadays, even significant risks for such injuries should entitle to compensation. In addition, the essay emphasizes that the ruling should be applicable on property damages.
Lastly, this study also discusses if the Court’s ruling is compatible with the two main functions of tort law, namely reparation and prevention. The extended concept of a personal injury means that compensation will be paid even though no damage has occurred. This is not compatible with the reparative function. There are, furthermore, uncertainties about whether the ruling is compatible with the preventive function. However, the wording of the Court’s ruling indicates that the risk assessment must be restrictive, which in turn would mean that the outcome is compatible with the preventive function.}},
author = {{Aldén, Sara}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{En skada eller inte en skada? - En rättslig analys av HD:s avgörande i PFAS-målet}},
year = {{2024}},
}