Gränsdragningsfrågan mellan aktieägartillskott, näringsbidrag och driftbidrag har före­kommit i domstolar i nästan 60 år. Trots antalet avgöranden är skiljelinjerna mellan dem inte klarlagda. Kommuner tillskjuter medel till sina bolag men tycks famla i blindo kring vilka skatterättsliga effekter detta kan medföra. Mer specifikt om dessa tillskott är skattepliktiga eller inte. I svallvågorna av rådande pandemi för­väntas behovet av ekonomiskt stöd till kommunala bolag att öka. Gränsdragningen kommer av denna orsak att återigen att aktualiseras i domstolar. Ett aktieägartillskott syftar till att öka ett bolags tillgångar utan att öka dess skulder och är inte skattepliktigt. En förutsättning för att ett tillskott ska anses utgöra ett aktieägar­tillskott är att det lämnas av aktieägaren i egenskap av just aktieägare. Ett driftbidrag ges i syfte att täcka underskott eller som ersättning för en prestation och är skattepliktigt. När det sker för att täcka underskott är detta för att kommunen har ett ekonomiskt ansvar för verksamheten. När det sker som ersättning är syftet att kompensera för prestationen. Ett näringsbidrag syftar till att stödja ett bolags verk­samhet och kan vara skattepliktigt beroende dess användning. En förutsättning för att reglerna om näringsbidrag ska vara tillämpliga är i sin tur att bidraget ges av annan anledning än att staten eller kommunen äger bolaget eller har ekonomiskt ansvar för dess verksamhet. När en kommun ger tillskott till ett hel- eller delägt bolag kan detta falla inom tillämpningsområdet för samtliga beteckningar. Gränsdragnings­problematiken kan liknas vid tre överlappande cirklar. På samma sätt så överlappar beteckningarnas tillämpningsområde varandra varvid skiljelinjerna är mycket svåra att avgöra.Gränsdragningen kan komma att ytterligare kompliceras av rådande pandemi. Exempelvis kan tillskott komma att betraktas som aktieägartillskott då det ges på grund av ökade kostnader orsakade av pandemin. Till följd av rådande omständigheter så kan det förväntas att frågan återigen blir högaktuell. I avsaknad av både lagstiftning och ett tydligt prejudikat från HFD så förblir gränsdragningsfrågan dock utan ett definitivt svar.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The essay is about the work environment at home, where the purpose is to examine the work evironment legislation at home and shed a light on the law's problem with the employer's work environment responsbility and whether there are regulations that prevent the employer's responsibility on the work environment at home work. Further the pupose is to analyze whether the work environment in homework is to noticed from an international perspective. The topic ”work environment at home work” has been selected beacuse it is topical as Covid-19 has forced organizations to reorganize their organizations, this may later lead to potential further changes in the future to increasingly allow workers to work at home. The legal dogamtic method has been used to analyze the issues and to achieve the purpose of the essay. Laws, regulations, propositions, public inquiries, lawsuits, sources of international law, literature, articles, reports and electronic materials have been used to analyze the legal aspects. EU-Osha and ILO are organisations that have been analyzed to achieve the international perspective of the essay. What can be stated after a careful analysis is that there are laws that regulate the work environment and work envirionment responsibility for work at home. The employer may finde it difficult to carry out his work for the work evironment when the workplace is at home for the employees. The reason is that there are other regulations that prevent the employer from performing certain actions in order to maintain it's work environment responsibility. Privacy is an important factor where the home should be a private sphere for the employee. What can further be stated is that the employee and the employer must have a good collaboration with each other where both parties illuminates and perform their work for the work environment, so this fulfills its pupose. From an international perspective, the analysis can state that both organizations have carried out work that draws attention to the work environment and its responsibilities when employees works at home. The organizations have many different points of view and tools for the work environment to help companies and employers to fulfill the responsibilities on work environment when the workplace is at the employees home.

For a long time, the legal framework of open involuntary mental treatment inSweden has been criticized as being contradictory and unpredictable. It iscrucial that the legislation concerning the restrictions of individual integrityand freedom should comply with the high standards of legal certainty (aSwedish term "rättssäkerhet"). It is of utmost importance that the involuntarymental treatment legislation is clear and predictable for both law practitionersand patients.In this thesis, the legal framework for open involuntary mental treatmentis investigated and critically assessed from a legal certainty perspective. Thisis done using the legal dogmatic method. The legal framework pertaining toopen involuntary mental treatment is given interpretation and systematisationwith the help of the traditional sources of law, such as legislation, case lawand preparatory works, as well as legal dogmatic literature.Open involuntary mental treatment may be provided to the patient outsideof the health care facility. This is possible if special conditions are met.Such conditions may require that the patient agree to receive medication orthat his or her whereabouts be restricted to a certain place. One of the legalprerequisites for open involuntary mental treatment is that the patient opposesthe treatment in question. At the same time, the medical providers are notallowed to use coercion to implement the treatment conditions, nor may theyimpose any sanctions if the patient does not comply with the prescribed conditionsof the care. Whilst the term open involuntary mental treatment (öppentvångsvård in Swedish, which can be translated literally as "open enforcedcare") signals the possibility of resorting to coercion, no coercive measuresare permitted within this form of care.However, it seems inconsistent to forbid the use of coercive measures ininvoluntary treatment, i.e. treatment which is given without a patient's consent.The way open involuntary mental treatment conditions are formally setforth in the Swedish legal system assumes that the patient opposes the treatment- whilst at the same time requiring that he or she must voluntarilycooperate during the aforesaid treatment. This appears to be contradictory.It can be argued that the patient's compliance with the special conditionsis based on the lack of knowledge of the rules that regulate open involuntarytreatment or on fear of being readmitted to inpatient care. It can also be discussedwhether such compliant behavior indicates the presence of an underlyingthreat or that the patient has been misguided or misinformed regardingthe regulation of open psychiatric care, which can be seen as manipulation. Thus, lack of consent on the one hand and lack of authority to resort tocoercion on the other hand appear to be two conflicting requirements preventingthe application of open involuntary care from complying with the legalrequirements. The study demonstrates that there are significant shortcomingsin the current regulation regarding open involuntary mental treatment, especiallyin terms of predictability. The analysis concludes that there is a need toreview the current legal framework for open involuntary mental treatment.4