• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 6
  • 1
  • 1
  • Tagged with
  • 8
  • 4
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • 3
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

Avtalstolkning, juridik eller sunt förnuft? : -en studie i svensk tolkningslära i ljuset av DCFR

Salander, Sofie, Parsa, Eric soroosh January 2015 (has links)
Syftet med uppsatsen är att identifiera hur avtal tolkas enligt svensk rätt och om det går att identifiera några mönster i tolkningsverksamheten. Det undersöks hur den svenska tolkningsläran överensstämmer med tolkningsreglerna i Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR). Europeiska unionen (EU) publicerade år 2009 DCFR – en akademisk text vars syfte bland annat var att förmedla kunskap om den gemensamma civilrätten inom unionen. Förhoppningen är att det i längden leder till en harmoniserad europeisk civilrätt. DCFR betraktas i dag som en icke bindande rättsakt – innehållande icke bindande regler som är ämnade att användas som hjälpmedel. DCFR innehåller ett kapitel om avtalstolkning som är tillämplig på oklara avtal, vilket är centralt för uppsatsen. Trots att DCFR inte är bindande har det ändå juridisk betydelse då innehållet kan bli föremål för jämförelser och belysa vad som anses gälla i svensk rätt. För att komma fram till resultatet arbetar vi utifrån den rättsdogmatiska metoden. Kärnan i utredningen och analysen ligger i en genomgång av en förhållandevis omfattande mängd rättspraxis från Högsta domstolen och Arbetsdomstolen. Dagligen ingås ett stort antal avtal. Vanligtvis sker det utan att problem uppstår; parterna fullgör vad de åtagit sig och avtalsförhållandet avvecklas. Problem kan uppstå när parterna har olika avsikter, avtalet är otydligt utformat eller när den ena parten inte fullgör sina förpliktelser. I svensk rätt finns inga lagregler för avtalstolkning, utan ledning får hämtas i rättspraxis. Domarna är ofta svårtolkade vilket gör att doktrin inom avtalsrättens område tillmäts stor betydelse. I doktrin råder det delade meningar om tolkningsläran eftersom författarna ställer upp tolkningsmodeller med olika benämningar.  Hänsyn tas framförallt till Adlercreutz och Lehrbergs framställningar då de är framstående rättsvetenskapsmän inom området. Modellerna presenteras och belyses med rättsfall från högsta instans. Tolkningsverksamheten i svensk rätt utmärks av vissa huvudsakliga drag. De subjektiva tolkningsmetoderna, i synnerhet den gemensamma partsviljan, har tolkningsföreträde framför andra tolkningsmetoder. I rättstillämpningen är tolkningsföremålet avtalet i förening med samtliga omständigheter vid och efter avtalsslutet. Resultatet för handen är att varje enskilt fall prövas utefter individuella omständigheter vilka i sin tur också kräver individuellt anpassade lösningar. Tolkningsverksamheten i DCFR utövas genom regler. Generella regler kan antas resultera i större grad förutsebarhet samtidigt som svensk tolkningslära möjligtvis tar större hänsyn till parternas avtal och därtill parternas verkliga viljor. DCFR kan ge rättstillämparen större utrymme för tolkning än vad reglerna föranleder på grund av normativt formulerade rekvisit. Sammanfattningsvis kan det konstateras att gemensamma drag kan urskiljas i utpekade delar av tolkningsverksamheten och att reglerna i DCFR påvisar många likheter i uppbyggnaden i jämförelse med den svenska tolkningsläran.
2

Köparens reklamationsrätt av jordbruksprodukter – En komparativ studie mellan KöpL, CISG och DCFR

Jansson, Adam January 2013 (has links)
A large part of the agricultural products that are sold in Sweden are imported because Sweden cannot meet the consumers agriculture products demand all year around. One problem that can occur and become problematic when trading across boarders is if there are errors in the delivered agricultural products. What must the Swedish buyer do, for example, make for it to be considered complained fault in the goods against the seller? Another problem in international trade is that the buyer may need to apply complaint rules they have not previously been in contact with since their domestic law is not always applicable to the contract. To avoid getting into this situation, the buyer should try to negotiate with the seller that the contracting parties shall use compensation claim rules that the buyer is familiar with, or which is even more advantageous than to the seller. This so that the buyer is not likely to neglect their right to sanctions against the seller. Since there are many different compensations claim rules to choose from for a buyer, it will be investigated in this paper which of the complaint rules of KöpL, CISG and the DCFR that is most advantageous complaint claims for the buyer regarding complaints of agricultural products. The paper will discuss and compare the complaint rules in KöpL, CISG and the DCFR about the risk of agriculture products, the buyer's duty, the buyer’s complaint period and the content and form of a message. With the help of discussion, it will appear that the KöpL has the most advantageous compensation claim rules for the buyer when the buyer is complaining about the delivered agricultural products to the seller. This because KöpL is most beneficial for the buyer regarding when the risk of agricultural products shall be deemed to pass to the buyer and the criterion concerning the content of the buyer’s complaint.
3

Škoda způsobená informací nebo radou - česká úprava, DCFR a PETL / Damage caused by information or advice - Czech adaptation, DCFR and PETL

Mladá, Klára January 2018 (has links)
Damage caused by information or advice - Czech adaptation, DCFR and PETL Abstract This thesis deals with liability for damage caused by administration of incorrect information or harmful advice, which is governed by Section 2950 of Act No. 89/2012 Coll., The Civil Code. At the same time, it deals with its relation to the documents of the European legislative groups, namely the document of the Principles of European Tort Law (PETL), and the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR). The aim of this thesis is to introduce annotated provision, its inclusion in the systematics of the Civil Code and to outline the possibilities and requirements of its application. This goal was also necessary to subject to an examination of the view of PETL and DCFR European documents, which inspired the legislative decision to include the annotated provision in its current form into the Code and even it was an inspiration for the creation of the Civic Code itself. In the context of introducing the annotated provision, it was necessary to develop the individual topics that formed the basis for accountability according to Civil Code in general, in the concrete in relation to the annnotated provision and, finally, in relation to the intentions of the PETL and DCFR European documents. The main subjects are therefore the subjects of...
4

Specificatio, Accessio & Confusio : En jämförelse mellan DCFR och svensk rätt avseende bearbetning, sammanfogande och sammanblandning av lös egendom.

Björn, Vægter January 2020 (has links)
No description available.
5

Civilinės deliktinės atsakomybės sąlygos: CK, Europos deliktų teisės principų ir DCFR palyginimas / Civil liability for delicts: a comparative study of the civil code, the principles of the european delict law and the draft common frame of reference (dcfr)

Liegutė, Gintarė 25 June 2014 (has links)
CK, PETL ir DCFR yra numatyta nuostatų, reguliuojančių deliktų teisę. CK yra teisės norminis aktas, todėl jo taisyklės yra privalomos, o PETL ir DCFR yra ne griežtoji teisė. Nepaisant to, Lietuvos teismų praktikoje jau yra atvejų, kuomet, aiškinant CK normas, remiamasi PETL. PETL ir DCFR yra taip pat reikšmingi plečiant žinias deliktų teisės srityje. CK neteisėti veiksmai yra suprantami pagal prancūziškosios deliktų teisės tradiciją, t. y. neteisėti veiksmai yra siejami su teise. PETL neteisėti veiksmai apibrėžiami kaip vokiečių deliktų teisės sistemos šalyse, nurodant kriterijus, į kuriuos atsižvelgiama sprendžiant, ar tam tikras interesas yra saugomas. DCFR seka anglų deliktų teisės tradicija ir konkrečiai įvardija atskirus deliktus, tačiau teismas, atsižvelgdamas į DCFR nurodytus kriterijus, taip pat gali nustatyti, kad tam tikra teisė ar interesas yra saugomas. CK kaltę apibrėžia kaip atidumo ir rūpestingumo nesilaikymą. CK preziumuojama kaltė yra objektyvi. Pagal PETL kaltė taip pat suprantama kaip objektyvaus atidumo ir rūpestingumo standarto nesilaikymas, tačiau ji nepreziumuojama. PETL įtvirtina ir kriterijus, pagal kuriuos nustatoma kaltė. PETL numatyta bendro pobūdžio griežtosios atsakomybės norma bei netiesioginė atsakomybė, kuriai priskiriama net ir tie atvejai, kai vertinama paties žalą atlyginančio asmens kaltė. DCFR apibrėžia dvi objektyvios kaltės formas (tyčią ir neatsargumą). DCFR griežtoji ir netiesioginė atsakomybė nėra išskiriama. CK, PETL ir DCFR... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania (hereafter – CC), Principles of European Tort Law (hereafter – PETL) and DCFR includes provisions regulating tort law. CC is statute law, its rules are compulsory. PETL and DCFR are soft law. Despite this, Lithuanian courts refer to PETL. PETL and DCFR are also significant in expanding the knowledge of tort law. Wrongfulness in CC is understood according to the French tort law tradition, i. e. wrongfulness is law-related. Wrongfulness in PETL is defined as it is in countries following the German tort law tradition. PETL also indicates certain criteria that are considered when deciding whether the interest is legally prohibited. DCFR follows the English tort law tradition and provides for particular delicts, but courts are allowed to state that a particular right or an interest is prohibited according to certain criteria that are enacted in DCFR. Fault in CC is defined as a violation of a standard of conduct. Fault is presumed and it is objective according to CC. PETL provides for the same definition of fault and indicates certain criteria of fault, but it is not presumed according to PETL. PETL also includes a general norm of strict liability and regulates vicarious liability which includes cases where the fault of a person who has to compensate the damage is considered. DCFR defines two forms of objective fault (intention and negligence). DCFR does not distinguish between strict liability and vicarious liability. CC, PETL and DCFR... [to full text]
6

Borgenärsskydd för lösöre i överlåtarens vård : Besittningskonstitut – hur främmande är det egentligen för svensk sakrätt?

Danielson, Axel January 2021 (has links)
No description available.
7

Borgenärsskydd för lösöre i överlåtarens vård : Besittningskonstitut – hur främmande är det egentligen för svensk sakrätt? / Protection Against the Transferor's Creditors for Moviable Property Detained With the Transferor : Possesion Agency – How Alien Is It Really for Swedish Property Law?

Danielson, Axel January 2022 (has links)
Swedish property law, when it comes to acquisition of movable property, the transferee does not acquire ownership as such, instead, the sale is considered protected against the claim of the seller’s creditors (borgenärsskydd). This is achieved through the delivery principle (traditionsprincipen), meaning in its Swedish sense that movable property must not necessarily be delivered into the trans- feree’s possession, but rather that the transferor’s possibility to dispose over the movable is severed. This principle has been subjected to considerable alterations, mainly due to allowing situations where the delivery principle would otherwise be practically impossible. These alterations raise the question of how far these legal solutions can be detached from the fundamental principle. Therefore, it is relevant to ponder, if these solutions, which can merely be considered as artificial solutions to satisfy a formal requirement, are like the constitutum possessorium of civil law orders This thesis will attend to this issue, addressing the following three questions: Question (i): how does the concept of ownership apply to legal questions in relation to the delivery principle in Swedish property law and the Draft Common Frame of Reference respectively? Question (ii): does Swedish property law grant protection against the transferor’s creditors although the movable is detained with the transferor? Question (iii): is there any systematic compatibility in relation to the delivery principle in Swedish property law and DCFR respectively? Espe- cially when the movable is detained with the transferor. In relation to question (i), it has been found that in DCFR, ownership is closely linked with possession, which means that ownership follows the delivery of possession. This is not necessarily the case in Swedish property law. Question (ii) is answered in connection to a study of Swedish case-law, which results in that the movable can be detained with the transferor, provided that some require- ments are fulfilled, only if it is a result of a physical action and not solely due to a contract. However, case-law has evolved this general rule to be subjected to a propensity of looking past, or creating new, requirements in order not to create unnecessary complications of compliance as far as it concerns honest transac- tions. This has resulted in a kind of peculiar flexibility. In answer to question (iii), due to the new types of solutions created not to complicate certain transactions, the possibility of reaching similar results as the continental principle is more prominent than one might have thought. Despite certain resemblances, the sys- tematic compatibility must be seen as limited, due to the difference in the respec- tive rules’ aim.
8

Borgenärsskydd för lösöre i överlåtarens vård : Besittningskonstitut - hur främmande är det egentligen för svensk sakrätt? / Protection Against the Transferor’s Creditor for Movable Property Detained With the Transferor : Possession Agency - Is It Really That Alien for Swedish Property Law

Danielson, Axel January 2022 (has links)
Swedish property law, when it comes to acquisition of movable property, the transferee does not acquire ownership as such, instead, the sale is considered protected against the claim of the seller’s creditors (borgenärsskydd). This is achieved through the delivery principle (traditionsprincipen), meaning in its Swedish sense that movable property must not necessarily be delivered into the trans- feree’s possession, but rather that the transferor’s possibility to dispose over the movable is severed. This principle has been subjected to considerable alterations, mainly due to allowing situations where the delivery principle would otherwise be practically impossible. These alterations raise the question of how far these legal solutions can be detached from the fundamental principle. Therefore, it is relevant to ponder, if these solutions, which can merely be considered as artificial solutions to satisfy a formal requirement, are like the constitutum possessorium of civil law orders This thesis will attend to this issue, addressing the following three questions: Question (i): how does the concept of ownership apply to legal questions in relation to the delivery principle in Swedish property law and the Draft Common Frame of Reference respectively? Question (ii): does Swedish property law grant protection against the transferor’s creditors although the movable is detained with the transferor? Question (iii): is there any systematic compatibility in relation to the delivery principle in Swedish property law and DCFR respectively? Espe- cially when the movable is detained with the transferor. In relation to question (i), it has been found that in DCFR, ownership is closely linked with possession, which means that ownership follows the delivery of possession. This is not necessarily the case in Swedish property law. Question (ii) is answered in connection to a study of Swedish case-law, which results in that the movable can be detained with the transferor, provided that some require- ments are fulfilled, only if it is a result of a physical action and not solely due to a contract. However, case-law has evolved this general rule to be subjected to a propensity of looking past, or creating new, requirements in order not to create unnecessary complications of compliance as far as it concerns honest transac- tions. This has resulted in a kind of peculiar flexibility. In answer to question (iii), due to the new types of solutions created not to complicate certain transactions, the possibility of reaching similar results as the continental principle is more prominent than one might have thought. Despite certain resemblances, the sys- tematic compatibility must be seen as limited, due to the difference in the respec- tive rules’ aim.

Page generated in 0.0189 seconds