Social- eller försäkringsrätt? En rättshistorisk undersökning av 1913 års lag om allmän pensionsförsäkring
(2025) LAGF03 20251Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- The essay examines both the relationship between the principle of need and the insurance principle within the draft law for the 1913 pensions act and the view of the law held by the legal practitioners within the parliament. The primary sources are examined directly and both the content of the draft and the debates in the chambers of the parliament are reviewed through a legal historical lens.
From this perspective the essay recites the relevant parts of the draft. Both the parts that are connected to the insurance principle and the principle of need are examined. The grounds of the different drafts are also examined and compared to each other. The reasonings of carefully selected legal partitioners that partook in the debate are... (More) - The essay examines both the relationship between the principle of need and the insurance principle within the draft law for the 1913 pensions act and the view of the law held by the legal practitioners within the parliament. The primary sources are examined directly and both the content of the draft and the debates in the chambers of the parliament are reviewed through a legal historical lens.
From this perspective the essay recites the relevant parts of the draft. Both the parts that are connected to the insurance principle and the principle of need are examined. The grounds of the different drafts are also examined and compared to each other. The reasonings of carefully selected legal partitioners that partook in the debate are presented and analysed. This is in turn connected to the above-mentioned principles to highlight the view of the legislation held by the members of parliament and the function of the proposed law.
The proposed legislation can in no easy way be binarily described as a product of either the principle of needs or the insurance principle. The proposed law can be more accurately described as a combination of multiple complex legal structures which often cannot be tied to only one of the principles. The legal practitioners within the debate show very shifting views of the function of the law and its desired place within society. There are sharp contrasts between the different views held by the members of parliament, but they all believed that the law had the ability to create great social change. This shows how both the proposed legislation and the views of it were multifaceted and that there was no consensus of what the purpose of the law was supposed to be. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Uppsatsen undersöker dels förhållandet mellan behovs- och försäkringsprin-cipen i förslagen till 1913 års lag om allmän pensionsförsäkring, dels den syn på rätten som juristerna i riksdagsdebatten hade. Undersökningen går direkt till primärkällorna och både förslagen och kammardebatterna undersöks ifrån ett rättshistoriskt perspektiv.
Uppsatsen redogör för de från detta perspektiv sett relevanta delarna av för-slagen. Både de delar av förslagen som kopplats till försäkringsprincipen och de delar som kopplats till behovsprincipen undersöks. Motiven bakom de olika förslagen undersöks också i dessa delar och jämförs med varandra. Den argumentation som förs av särskilt utvalda jurister som deltog i debatten pre-senteras och analyseras. Detta... (More) - Uppsatsen undersöker dels förhållandet mellan behovs- och försäkringsprin-cipen i förslagen till 1913 års lag om allmän pensionsförsäkring, dels den syn på rätten som juristerna i riksdagsdebatten hade. Undersökningen går direkt till primärkällorna och både förslagen och kammardebatterna undersöks ifrån ett rättshistoriskt perspektiv.
Uppsatsen redogör för de från detta perspektiv sett relevanta delarna av för-slagen. Både de delar av förslagen som kopplats till försäkringsprincipen och de delar som kopplats till behovsprincipen undersöks. Motiven bakom de olika förslagen undersöks också i dessa delar och jämförs med varandra. Den argumentation som förs av särskilt utvalda jurister som deltog i debatten pre-senteras och analyseras. Detta kopplas i sin tur till de ovan nämnda principer-na i syfte att belysa ledamöternas syn på rätten och den föreslagna lagens funktion.
Lagstiftningen kan inte på något enkelt sätt klassificeras som en produkt av vare sig behovs- eller försäkringsprincipen. I stället kan lagstiftningen mer träffsäkert beskrivas som en sammansättning av flera relativt komplexa rätts-liga konstruktioner som ofta inte enbart kan hänföras till en av principerna. Juristerna i debatten visar en väldigt skiftande syn på lagens funktion och dess önskade plats i samhällsordningen. Synen på lagens syfte skiljer sig markant mellan de olika debattörerna, men de tror alla att den skulle kunna få stora sociala konsekvenser. Detta visar hur båda lagstiftningen och synen på den var mångfacetterat och att det ej fanns någon konsensus om vad syftet med lagen faktiskt skulle vara. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9190859
- author
- Hultman, Tim Sebastian LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20251
- year
- 2025
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Rättshistoria, legal history, socialförsäkringsrätt, pensionsrätt, pension, ålderdomsförsäkring, rättsvetenskap
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9190859
- date added to LUP
- 2025-06-23 13:00:18
- date last changed
- 2025-06-23 13:00:18
@misc{9190859,
abstract = {{The essay examines both the relationship between the principle of need and the insurance principle within the draft law for the 1913 pensions act and the view of the law held by the legal practitioners within the parliament. The primary sources are examined directly and both the content of the draft and the debates in the chambers of the parliament are reviewed through a legal historical lens.
From this perspective the essay recites the relevant parts of the draft. Both the parts that are connected to the insurance principle and the principle of need are examined. The grounds of the different drafts are also examined and compared to each other. The reasonings of carefully selected legal partitioners that partook in the debate are presented and analysed. This is in turn connected to the above-mentioned principles to highlight the view of the legislation held by the members of parliament and the function of the proposed law.
The proposed legislation can in no easy way be binarily described as a product of either the principle of needs or the insurance principle. The proposed law can be more accurately described as a combination of multiple complex legal structures which often cannot be tied to only one of the principles. The legal practitioners within the debate show very shifting views of the function of the law and its desired place within society. There are sharp contrasts between the different views held by the members of parliament, but they all believed that the law had the ability to create great social change. This shows how both the proposed legislation and the views of it were multifaceted and that there was no consensus of what the purpose of the law was supposed to be.}},
author = {{Hultman, Tim Sebastian}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Social- eller försäkringsrätt? En rättshistorisk undersökning av 1913 års lag om allmän pensionsförsäkring}},
year = {{2025}},
}