Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Riskfördelningen i AB 04 i ljuset av samlade störningskrav

Benatti, Bianca LU (2024) JURM02 20242
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Entreprenadavtal kännetecknas av långvariga projekt med många inblandade
parter och möjligheten för beställaren att ändra föremålet för entreprenaden
under projektets gång. Förändrade förutsättningar leda till merkostnader där
entreprenören kan vilja kräva ersättning. AB 04, ett av de vanligaste
standardavtalen, ger entreprenören rätt till ersättning under vissa
förhållanden. Men vid störningar i entreprenaden, som kännetecknas av
effektivitetsförluster och följdkostnader, kan det i omfattande eller komplexa
entreprenader vara svårt att allokera dessa kostnader till enskilda störningar.
Detta leder ibland till så kallade "samlade störningskrav", där entreprenören
framställer ett samlat krav utan att specificera varje störning.... (More)
Entreprenadavtal kännetecknas av långvariga projekt med många inblandade
parter och möjligheten för beställaren att ändra föremålet för entreprenaden
under projektets gång. Förändrade förutsättningar leda till merkostnader där
entreprenören kan vilja kräva ersättning. AB 04, ett av de vanligaste
standardavtalen, ger entreprenören rätt till ersättning under vissa
förhållanden. Men vid störningar i entreprenaden, som kännetecknas av
effektivitetsförluster och följdkostnader, kan det i omfattande eller komplexa
entreprenader vara svårt att allokera dessa kostnader till enskilda störningar.
Detta leder ibland till så kallade "samlade störningskrav", där entreprenören
framställer ett samlat krav utan att specificera varje störning. Dessa krav
regleras inte uttryckligen i AB 04 men det är genom avtalet som kraven får
hanteras.
AB 04 syftar till att uppnå en optimal ekonomisk riskfördelning mellan
parterna, men begreppet samlade störningskrav är inte direkt reglerat i
standardavtalet. Detta väcker frågor om hur sådana krav ska hanteras och hur
väl parternas intressen och risker tillgodoses inom ramen för avtalet.
Uppsatsen analyserar hur samlade störningskrav förhåller sig till
riskfördelningen i AB 04 och utreder om det finns behov av en reviderad
reglering för att bättre balansera parternas intressen. Innebörden av störningar
och samlade störningskrav klarläggs, relevanta bestämmelser i AB 04
analyseras, och en bedömning görs om regleringen behöver justeras för att
skapa en bättre balans mellan parternas intressen.
Entreprenörens intresse av att framställa ett samlat störningskrav ligger i att
få full ersättning för arbeten kopplade till störningar när det är svårt att fördela
kostnaderna på enskilda händelser. Samtidigt har beställaren ett intresse av
att kunna bemöta krav som ställs mot denne och undgå att betala för kostnader
som inte klart ligger inom beställarens risk.
På grund av att det råder delade meningar kring vad störningar och samlade
störningskrav innebär, är inte säkert hur dessa ska hanteras i AB 04. Det torde
dock inte vara materiellt omöjligt för entreprenören att få ersättning genom
ett sådant krav. För entreprenörens del blir det dock den huvudsakliga frågan
om att kunna uppfylla de olika rekvisiten i bestämmelser om störning som
finns i AB 04.
Inom den nuvarande regleringen i AB 04 är det svårt att förena parternas
intressen vid samlade störningskrav med de rättigheter och skyldigheter som
avtalet stipulerar, både när det gäller individuella intressen och gemensamma
mål om effektivitet och förutsebarhet. Regleringen bör säkerställa att
riskfördelningen speglar parternas intressen i avtalet och att denna reglering är balanserad. Vid samlade störningskrav innebär detta att entreprenören får
ersättning vid berättigade krav, samtidigt som beställaren kan förutse och
undvika ogrundade krav. Ett behov av en reviderad reglering anses föreligga
med tanke på den riskförskjutning som samlade störningskrav innebär. (Less)
Abstract
Construction contracts are characterized by long-term projects involving
many parties and the possibility for the client to alter the scope of the project
during its course. Changed conditions may lead to additional costs, where the
contractor may want to seek compensation. AB 04, one of the most common
standard agreements, grants the contractor the right to compensation under
certain circumstances. However, in cases of disruptions, characterized by
inefficiencies and consequential costs, it can be difficult in large or complex
projects to allocate these costs to individual disturbances. This sometimes
leads to so-called "global claims," where the contractor presents a collected
claim without specifying each disturbance. These... (More)
Construction contracts are characterized by long-term projects involving
many parties and the possibility for the client to alter the scope of the project
during its course. Changed conditions may lead to additional costs, where the
contractor may want to seek compensation. AB 04, one of the most common
standard agreements, grants the contractor the right to compensation under
certain circumstances. However, in cases of disruptions, characterized by
inefficiencies and consequential costs, it can be difficult in large or complex
projects to allocate these costs to individual disturbances. This sometimes
leads to so-called "global claims," where the contractor presents a collected
claim without specifying each disturbance. These claims are not explicitly
regulated in AB 04, but the agreement is the framework through which they
must be managed.
AB 04 aims to achieve an optimal economic risk distribution between the
parties, but the concept of global claims is not directly regulated in the
standard agreement. This raises questions about how such claims should be
handled and how well the interests and risks of the parties are handled
within the agreement’s framework. The thesis analyzes how global claims
relate to the risk distribution in AB 04 and examines whether there is a need
for revised regulations to better balance the interests of the parties. The
meaning of disruptions and global claims is clarified, relevant provisions in
AB 04 are analyzed, and an assessment is made as to whether the
regulations need to be revised to create a better balance between the parties'
interests.
The contractor's interest in presenting a global claim lies in obtaining full
compensation for work related to disruptions when it is difficult to allocate
the costs to individual disruptions. At the same time, the client has an
interest in being able to respond to claims made against them and avoid
paying for costs that may not necessarily fall within the client's risk.
Due to differing opinions on what disruptions and global claims entail, it is
not clear how these should be handled under AB 04. However, it is not
materially impossible for the contractor to receive compensation through
such a claim. For the contractor, the main issue will be fulfilling the various
criteria in the provisions on disturbances outlined in AB 04.
Under the current regulations in AB 04, it is difficult to reconcile the parties'
interests in global claims with the rights and obligations stipulated by the
agreement, both in terms of individual interests and the shared goals of
efficiency and predictability. The regulation should ensure that the risk
distribution reflects the parties' interests in the agreement and that this regulation is balanced. In the case of global claims, this means the
contractor should receive compensation for valid claims, while the client
can predict and avoid unfounded claims. There is a perceived need for
revised regulations, considering the risk shift that collective disturbance
claims entail. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Benatti, Bianca LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Risk allocation in AB 04 in the light of global claims
course
JURM02 20242
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Avtalsrätt, Standardavtalsrätt, Entreprenadrätt
language
Swedish
id
9180226
date added to LUP
2025-01-29 15:05:45
date last changed
2025-01-29 15:05:45
@misc{9180226,
  abstract     = {{Construction contracts are characterized by long-term projects involving
many parties and the possibility for the client to alter the scope of the project
during its course. Changed conditions may lead to additional costs, where the
contractor may want to seek compensation. AB 04, one of the most common
standard agreements, grants the contractor the right to compensation under
certain circumstances. However, in cases of disruptions, characterized by
inefficiencies and consequential costs, it can be difficult in large or complex
projects to allocate these costs to individual disturbances. This sometimes
leads to so-called "global claims," where the contractor presents a collected
claim without specifying each disturbance. These claims are not explicitly
regulated in AB 04, but the agreement is the framework through which they
must be managed.
AB 04 aims to achieve an optimal economic risk distribution between the
parties, but the concept of global claims is not directly regulated in the
standard agreement. This raises questions about how such claims should be
handled and how well the interests and risks of the parties are handled
within the agreement’s framework. The thesis analyzes how global claims
relate to the risk distribution in AB 04 and examines whether there is a need
for revised regulations to better balance the interests of the parties. The
meaning of disruptions and global claims is clarified, relevant provisions in
AB 04 are analyzed, and an assessment is made as to whether the
regulations need to be revised to create a better balance between the parties'
interests.
The contractor's interest in presenting a global claim lies in obtaining full
compensation for work related to disruptions when it is difficult to allocate
the costs to individual disruptions. At the same time, the client has an
interest in being able to respond to claims made against them and avoid
paying for costs that may not necessarily fall within the client's risk.
Due to differing opinions on what disruptions and global claims entail, it is
not clear how these should be handled under AB 04. However, it is not
materially impossible for the contractor to receive compensation through
such a claim. For the contractor, the main issue will be fulfilling the various
criteria in the provisions on disturbances outlined in AB 04.
Under the current regulations in AB 04, it is difficult to reconcile the parties'
interests in global claims with the rights and obligations stipulated by the
agreement, both in terms of individual interests and the shared goals of
efficiency and predictability. The regulation should ensure that the risk
distribution reflects the parties' interests in the agreement and that this regulation is balanced. In the case of global claims, this means the
contractor should receive compensation for valid claims, while the client
can predict and avoid unfounded claims. There is a perceived need for
revised regulations, considering the risk shift that collective disturbance
claims entail.}},
  author       = {{Benatti, Bianca}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Riskfördelningen i AB 04 i ljuset av samlade störningskrav}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}