I den här uppsatsen har en konflikt mellan grundläggande EU-rättsliga värden utforskats genom en studie av den europeiska utredningsordern. Konflikten består i användandet av principerna om ömsesidigt förtroende och erkännande på straffrättens område, samtidigt som dessa principer ibland kolliderar med respekten för mänskliga rättigheter så som de definieras inom unionen. För att ge principerna om ömsesidigt förtroende och erkännande fullt genomslag skulle ett beslut om att begära en viss utredningsåtgärd från en annan stat behöva erkännas och verkställas utan någon extra prövning i den verkställande staten. För att ge mänskliga rättigheter fullt genomslag skulle å andra sidan den verkställande staten behöva göra en sådan prövning. Den här konflikten har tidigare utforskats i samband med den europeiska arresteringsordern, medan utredningsordern inte har fått samma uppmärksamhet. Det har kunnat konstateras att det finns många likheter mellan den europeiska arresteringsordern och utredningsordern, men att den senare också står inför helt egna utmaningar. Det finns nämligen stora skillnader mellan ett verkställande av ett överlämnade av en person till en annan stat, och ett verkställande av en utredningsåtgärd, så som till exempel en husrannsakan. Detta gör att den praxis som finns avseende den europeiska arresteringsordern måste behandlas med försiktighet. / In this essay a conflict between fundamental values of the European Union law has been explored through a study of the European Investigation Order. The conflict consists of the use of the principles of mutual trust and recognition within the area of criminal law, when these principles might collide with the respect for human rights as they are defined within the Union. I order to give full weight to the principles of mutual trust and recognition it would be necessary for the executing state to recognize and execute a decision of an investigative measure emanating from the issuing state without any further substantial assessment. For human rights to be adequately protected, it might however be necessary for the executing state to make that very assessment before executing the investigative measure in question. This conflict has already been explored in connection with the European Arrest Warrant, but the European Investigation Order has not yet received the same attention. There are many similarities indeed between the two, but the European Investigation Order also has completely unique challenges. One must keep in mind that there are great differences between an extradition decision and an execution of an investigative measure, as for example a search. This makes it essential to treat the Investigation Order as its own, viewing the case law regarding the Arrest Warrant with some precaution.

The purpose of the research is the analysis of the concept of bad faith in the sphere of trade marks from the perspective of a fair balance of different interests of the trade mark proprietor and other undertakings in the European market. On the one hand, the starting point of European trade mark law is the protection of exclusive rights conferred on the owner of a registered mark. On the other hand, Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union guarantees the right to free access to the market. The research work analyses the scope of these conflicting rights and comes to the conclusion that the interests of trade mark law and market competition may have common ground despite different starting points between them. Bad faith behaviour in the market should also be assessed as an acute common issue. In that connection, the objective of the thesis is to examine how the balance of the interests is achieved in European trade mark legislation and in practice, whether this balance is fair when dealing with bad faith. Additionally, the thesis considers the issues of the definition of bad faith in European legislation and possible changes in the European trade mark system related to the concept of bad faith.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis concerns the issue of injunctive relief and specific performance in arbitration. The availability of such relief varies significantly between different jurisdictions and the issue is further complicated when parties opt out of litigation in favor of arbitration, not the least in terms of enforcement. In light of this, the thesis aims to determine the consequences for parties opting for arbitration instead of litigation with regard to the availability and enforceability of specific performance and injunctive relief. This overall research question has been answered under the laws of Sweden and the United States of America. First, this thesis has concluded that there are considerable differences between the jurisdictions in the availability of specific performance and injunctive relief in litigation. In Sweden, remedies are issues of substantive law and for many kinds of contracts, the primary remedy for breach. Consequently, courts do not differentiate claims for specific performance or injunctive relief, and routinely grant such claims in no different way than granting monetary relief. Conversely, in the United States, remedies are viewed as procedural issues, not substantive. There, specific performance and injunctive relief are discretionary matters of equity and not rights at law. Hence, the availability of specific performance and injunctive relief is limited as compared to damages. Further, this thesis has concluded that the categorization of reliefs and remedies as substantive and procedural, respectively, is mirrored also in arbitration. While in Sweden, the choice of arbitration as proper contract forum does not affect the availability of the reliefs now in question, it does so in the United States. There, courts have held that the division of remedies into legal and equitable is not applicable in arbitration. Thus, parties have the freedom to by contract control which reliefs an arbitrator may grant. In absence of such agreements, courts have presumed arbitrators to have been given a broad grant of authority, allowing otherwise unavailable reliefs.Third, this thesis has concluded that, inter alia, because of the inherent contempt powers of courts in the United States, the means of enforcing arbitral awards providing specific performance and injunctive relief are more extensive in the United States than in Sweden, where comparable powers do not exist. Further, parties may by means of contract, grant arbitrators the authority to supervise such reliefs and enforce previously granted specific performance and injunctions by contractual fines and sanctions. Again, in absence of explicit contract language such authority is presumed in the United States, but not in Sweden. Overall, the choice of arbitration has consequences in both jurisdictions. In the United States, mostly for the availability of the reliefs in question and in Sweden, mostly for the enforcement.

No description available.

När en arbetsgivare är bunden av två konkurrerande kollektivavtal får andrahandskollektiv-avtalet – enligt principen om konkurrerande kollektivavtal – endast en begränsad rättsverkan i jämförelse med rättsverkan hos ett förstahandskollektivavtal. Principen om konkurrerande kollektivavtal, som utvecklats i Arbetsdomstolens praxis, innebär att arbetsgivaren som huvudregel endast är skyldig att tillämpa bestämmelserna i förstahandskollektivavtalet. För att principen dock ska aktualiseras krävs det att bestämmelserna i första- och andrahands-kollektivavtalet konkurrerar på ett sådant sätt att en samtidig tillämpning av båda bestämmelserna skulle medföra betydande olägenheter för arbetsgivaren. För att avgöra om så är fallet krävs det dock att innehållet i båda bestämmelserna först tolkas för att därefter avgöra om arbetsgivaren riskerar att åläggas att agera på olika sätt i förhållande till de olika bestämmelserna. Så är alltid fallet om bestämmelserna är oförenliga såtillvida att en tillämpning av bestämmelsen i andrahandskollektivavtalet står i strid med en bestämmelse i förstahandskollektivavtalet. Så kan dock även vara fallet trots att bestämmelserna inte är direkt oförenliga men då under förutsättning att bestämmelserna ändå skiljer sig åt såtillvida att arbetsgivaren måste anpassa sitt agerande i förhållande till bestämmelserna i respektive kollektivavtal för att inte strida mot endera.

The increased digitalisation has resulted in a large portion of the population being connected in a digital environment and engaging with each other on digital platforms. A certain type of problem that has been addressed involves women being targeted by online abuse, because they are seen as group members that represent their gender and characteristics related to gender. Women compared to men are more likely to be subjected to sexualised threats of violence. A committee of inquiry has recently been appointed to investigate whether offences with the motive for the act being to insult somebody on grounds of his or her gender should lead to an increased penalty value by the rule in Ch. 29, sec. 2, p. 7 of the Swedish Criminal Code (Sw. brottsbalken [1962:700]). Simultaneously the Committee will investigate if there is an actual need to include gender as a protected ground in the mentioned provision, since there is a possibility to increase the penalty value under the legislation in force due to such motive.  This essay strives to investigate how gender as a motive of crime is considered when applying the law, wherefore the current legislation will be addressed. The Committee seems to have its starting point in the rule on aggravating circumstances related to hate crime, which in its nature constitutes a part of the general hate crime legislation. Therefore, gender as a protected ground in the hate crime legislation is examined. A comparative law analysis is made to Finnish law which will include gender as a ground in a similar rule. A proposal for a directive from the European Union regarding gender-based acts is referred to, because of its impact on Swedish legislation once adopted by the European Parliament. Relevant legal literature is also of interest when answering if gender-based acts should be considered as hate crime. The protection for transgender people under hate crime legislation is briefly addressed to gain valuable insights to compare this group’s protection with cisgender persons’ current or future protection. A case study is performed with two judgments from the Courts of Appeal to discover similarities and differences between these judgements regarding the evaluation of the defendant’s motive to the crime. To not limit the sources of material a combined legal dogmatic and analytical method is applied. This method allows for the use of criminological literature and governmental manuals to answer the questions at issue. Throughout the analysis it is made clear that gender as a motive to an act, is not implemented by the courts. Furthermore, the advantages and disadvantages of a tougher legal approach, regarding gender-based acts and gender as a protected ground in the rule on aggravating circumstances related to hate crime, are discussed.  In conclusion women are far more exposed to gender-based acts in a digital environment and there are good reasons to let such motive increase the penalty value. Women as a group should be included in the rule on aggravating circumstances due to their exposure to gender-based acts. Simultaneously it is important that the Committee considers acts outside of the digital sphere, due to the general applicability of the rule. The Committee is encouraged to determine whether gender ought to be a protected ground in all hate crime legislation. / Den ökade digitaliseringen har medfört att befolkningen i stort vistas i digital miljö och interagerar med varandra på digitala plattformar. En viss problematik som har uppmärksammats är företeelsen att kvinnor blir föremål för systematiska kränkningar i digital miljö, eftersom de ses som gruppmedlemmar som representerar sitt kön och egenskaper hänförliga till könet. Kvinnor jämfört med män synes också motta bl.a. sexualiserade hot om våld i större utsträckning. En kommitté har nyligen tillsatts för att utreda om gärningar med motiv att kränka någon till följd av hans eller hennes kön ska verka straffvärdehöljande med stöd av 29 kap. 2 § 7 p. brottsbalken (1962:700). Samtidigt ska kommittén utreda om det finns ett behov att inkludera kön i straffskärpningsregeln, eftersom det enligt gällande rätt går att tillmäta ett sådant könsrelaterat motiv i straffskärpande riktning.  Uppsatsen syftar till att utreda hur kön som motiv till en gärning beaktas av rättstillämparen i dag, varför en redogörelse av gällande rätt görs. Utredningen synes utgå från straffskärpningsregeln, som till sin karaktär utgör en del av hatbrottslagstiftningen. Av denna anledning redogörs och utreds därför om kön kan utgöra en skyddad grupp inom ramen för hatbrottslagstiftningen. En rättsjämförelse görs till finsk lagstiftning som i en motsvarande hatbrottspräglad straffskärpningsregel kommer att inkludera grunden ”kön”. Även ett förslag till direktiv från Europeiska unionen utreds i fråga om könsrelaterade kränkningar eftersom detta, om det antas av Europaparlamentet, kommer att behöva harmoniseras i inhemsk strafflagstiftning. Det redogörs även för relevant juridisk litteratur för att belysa frågan om könsrelaterade gärningar kan utgöra hatbrott. Transpersoners straffrättsliga skydd i hatbrottslagstiftningen behandlas i korthet, för att kunna ge värdefulla insikter vad gäller gruppens skydd ställt mot cispersoners nuvarande eller framtida skydd. En rättsfallsstudie av två hovrättsavgöranden utförs därför för att kunna se likheter och skillnader avseende domstolarnas bedömning i fråga om motiv till gärningarna. En kombinerad rättsdogmatisk och rättsanalytisk metod används för att inte begränsa materialomfånget, utan inkluderar även viss kriminologisk litteratur och myndighetsmanualer på området för att kunna besvara frågeställningarna. I analysen konstateras att kön som motiv till en gärning inte tillmäts betydelse av domstolarna. Vidare diskuteras fördelar och nackdelar med en skärpt syn på könsrelaterade gärningar, och om grunden ”kön” ska ingå i straffskärpningsregeln som tar sikte på hatbrottsmotiv.  Slutsatsen är att kvinnor är särskilt utsatta för könsrelaterade gärningar främst i digital miljö och det finns skäl för att motivet inverkar höjande på straffvärdet. Till följd av utsattheten för könsrelaterade gärningar bör kvinnor som grupp upptas i straffskärpningsregeln, eftersom vissa företrädare utsätts för sådana gärningar till följd av sitt kön. Samtidigt är det av vikt att den svenska utredningen beaktar angrepp utanför den digitala miljön, eftersom regelns tillämpning är generell. Kommittén uppmanas även att utröna om ”kön” ska ingå i all hatbrottslagstiftning.

The basis of any contract is the agreement of two or more parties. In traditional Swedish and English contract law theory, a contract is formed through the reciprocal exchange of an offer and a corresponding acceptance. Together, these declarations of will represent the common intent of the parties, which binds them to their respective contractual obligations and determines the contents of the contract. In the contemporary commercial sector, the use of standard forms (i.e., sets of terms that have not been individually negotiated) has become more prevalent. This has led to the rise of a particular legal issue, called the “battle of forms”: a situation where both parties refer to their own, conflicting, standard forms during the formation of contract, where after they proceed in fulfilling their contractual obligations. Consequently, the exchanged declarations of will lack conformity in these cases, and there is no discernible common will of the parties. In order to conclude that a contract has been formed, and to decide its contents, this conflict needs to be resolved. The traditional approach to resolving the issue of battle of forms in English law is to regard the last referenced standard terms in the contractual negotiations as an offer (or counter-offer), and the other party’s conduct as an acceptance. This approach largely corresponds with how the issue likely would be resolved according to traditional Swedish contract law principles. However, in the legal scientific environments of both Sweden and England, ideas and concepts of a modern contract law has developed. Included therein is the idea of taking a more flexible stance with regard to the formation of contract. When viewing the contractual relationship holistically, and partly liberated from the offer-acceptance approach, the battle of forms can be resolved by letting the court construe the different sets of terms together, and re-place conflicting terms with suitable substitutes by implication. These modern concepts have partly manifested in recent English precedence regarding the battle of forms. Considering that the patterns of development with respect to the modern law of contract are similar in Swedish and English law, there is reason to believe that a similar “new” approach to the battle of forms might be adopted by Swedish courts as well.