Global ETD Search

1	Separationsrätt vid sammanblandad egendom / Right to separate mixed property Svensson, Daniel, Mellkvist, Rasmus January 2016 (has links) One of the most complicated areas of the law is rem. The reason behind such a statement is the fact that the legislature never completed a collective overhaul of the area. Rem is intended to deal with and clear up third party conflicts where multiple party’s have claims on the same property. Equally legitimate interest collides and it is more or less impossible to in advance determine whose interest is the most worth. It seems there has been a tendency from the legislature to ignore the rem and instead deal with concrete problems as they arise. Lag (1944:181) om redovisningsmedel is one of those phenomenon’s where middleman’s have been given the possibility to separate mixed property for their principals. In the preparatory work to the law multiple requisites has been left open for the courts to determine. The law is not intended to be applied conversely and it is therefore possible to obtain the right to separate property outside of the laws applicability. This bachelor thesis primary focus is to investigate if Lag om redovisningsmedels shape gives satisfying predictability. In addition to this an examination of unique cases has been done where the right to separate mixed property has been given outside of the area of Lag om redovisningsmedels applicability. The method of legal dogmatic is being used to interpret and analyze the compiled material. The research shows that the legal system to which rem belongs to is unclear. Lagen om redovisningsmedels requisites are far from clear and the current state of the preceding judgments are ambiguous. The courts haven’t despite the unique cases NJA 1994 s. 506 and NJA 2009 s. 500 managed to establish a general principle. It’s a necessity for the business life to be able to predict the consequences of their actions and thus dare to entrust others with their property. With a limited amount of legislation about mixed property it is important that preceding judgments can create satisfying predictability. The fact that in multiple of cases the judges divert amongst themselves about the grounds of judgment creates only more uncertainty. It is however possible to recognize that theft and practical reasons can lead to a more outstretched possibility to separate mixed property. The Supreme Court has however expressed that these conditions hasn’t led to a general principle about which circumstances has a higher value of protection. The underlying thoughts from the legislative has been to hand over the responsibility for the development of the area to the courts. The current state of this area of the law is throughout uncertain and no satisfying predictability can be found. / Rättsområdet benämnt som sakrätt utgör ett av juridikens mest komplicerade områden. Anledningen till ett sådant påstående är det faktum att lagstiftaren aldrig genomfört en samlad systematisk översyn av området. Sakrätten är avsedd att behandla och utreda tredjemanskonflikter där flera parter har anspråk på samma egendom. Jämbördigt legitima intressen kolliderar och det är mer eller mindre omöjligt att på förhand avgöra vems intresse som är värt mest. Det verkar ha funnits en tendens att ignorera sakrätten från lagstiftarens sida och istället tagit tag i konkreta problem när de dykt upp. Lag (1944:181) om redovisningsmedel utgör ett sådant fenomen där sysslomän getts möjligheten att avskilja egendom för huvudmans räkning. I förarbetena till lagen har dock flertalet av rekvisiten lämnats till rättskiparen att fastställa. Lagen är dock inte avsedd att tillämpas é contrario och det är därför möjligt att erhålla separationsrätt även utanför lagens tillämpningsområde. Uppsatsens huvudsakliga fokus ligger på att undersöka om Lag om redovisningsmedels utformning ger en tillfredsställande förutsebarhet. Därutöver undersöks unika fall där separationsrätt medgetts utanför lag om redovisningsmedels tillämpbarhet. Den rättsdogmatiska metoden har använts för att tolka och analysera framtaget material. Utredningen visar på att rättsläget beträffande sammanblandad egendom genomgående är oklart. Lagen om redovisningsmedels rekvisit är långt ifrån uttömmande och rättspraxis är mångtydigt. Domstolarna har inte trots de unika fallen NJA 1994 s. 506 och NJA 2009 s. 500 lyckats fastställa en allmän princip. Det är nödvändigt för affärslivet att kunna förutse konsekvenserna av sina förehavanden och således våga anförtro annan sin egendom. Med en begränsad lagstiftning avseende sammanblandad egendom är det viktigt att de prejudikat som skapas ger en tillfredsställande förutsebarhet. Faktumet att det i ett flertal domar råder skiljaktiga meningar bland justitieråden påvisar ytterligare osäkerhet. Det går emellertid urskilja att stöld och praktiska skäl kan leda till en mer långtgående separationsrätt. Högsta domstolen har dock uttalat att dessa förutsättningar inte lett till någon generell princip om vilka omständigheter som är att anse som mer skyddsvärda. Utgångspunkten från lagstiftarens sida har varit att överlämna ansvaret för rättsutvecklingen på rättskiparen. Rättsläget är dock genomgående oklart och någon tillfredsställande förutsebarhet kan inte konstateras. Bibehållen äganderätt Separationsrätt Lag om redovisningsmedel Separationsrätt trots sammanblandning Sakrätt
2	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. Legotillverkning separationsrätt DCFR sakrätt bearbetning sammanfogande sammanblandning Law Juridik
3	Tredjepartslogistik ur ett sakrättsligt perspektiv / Third Party Logistics : from a law of property perspective Maksinen, Kristina January 2003 (has links) It has become fairly common for a company to outsource one or several of its logistic activities to a party separate from the business of the company itself. Since the original agreement usually involves two parties, the seller and the buyer, the logistics company is called the third party. The relationship between the outsourcing company and the third party varies in form and in depth but can sometimes be very close, almost to be considered a joint venture. When the co-operation between the two parties includes more than just one separate logistic service and the third party adapts its business to a certain extent to his principals needs, it constitutes third party logistics. If the logistics company, or a party employed by it, becomes insolvent when having the entrusted goods in his possession questions may arise concerning the right to the property. The company in bankruptcy in most cases has no claims of its own to the property. It is normally the creditors of the insolvent party who claim that the property ought to be a part of the bankrupt’s estate. According to the principal rule the owner of property always has the right to separation of his property. There are however several cases when thisright of separation is set aside to protect other interests. The goods kept by the third party are very often homogenous products since one of the advantages of engaging a third party is connected to large-scale transportation or large-scale stock-keeping. In such a situation the goods can be mixed with similar goods for practical reasons. When the owner has the ability of identifying his goods among the others by presenting a mark or a separate container in which his goods are placed his right to separation remains. However, if he doesn’t have the ability to do so he loses that right and is left with nothing but a right to claim a certain value in the bankruptcy. This often means the same thing as being left with nothing. The logistics business has developed into consisting of more than traditional logistic activities such as for example transportation. A third party logistics company often takes part in the packaging or distribution process. This way the third party sometimes becomes a part of the manufacturing chain. This has lead to another situation in which the original owner of the goods may lose his right to the goods. In spite of having contributed with all the material and instructions to manufacture a product, the principal may lose his right to the goods if they are transformed to such a large extent that they can be seen as something completely different from the material given at first. Even when the two parties have agreed that the right to the final product should be given to the original owner of the material the conflict might anyhow remain between him and the third party’s creditors. These issues involving creditors’ claims are implied by force. Therefore there is usually no way for the outsourcing company to protect itself against them by means of a contract. One of the objects of this dissertation is to shed light upon these problems. Another object of my work is to map out the current legislation and precedent in order to evaluate it to see how well it serves its purposes. Law Tredjepartslogistik Nätverkslogistik Legobearbetning Sammanblandning Sakrätt RÄTTSVETENSKAP/JURIDIK LAW/JURISPRUDENCE RÄTTSVETENSKAP/JURIDIK
4	Tredjepartslogistik ur ett sakrättsligt perspektiv / Third Party Logistics : from a law of property perspective Maksinen, Kristina January 2003 (has links) <p>It has become fairly common for a company to outsource one or several of its logistic activities to a party separate from the business of the company itself. Since the original agreement usually involves two parties, the seller and the buyer, the logistics company is called the third party. The relationship between the outsourcing company and the third party varies in form and in depth but can sometimes be very close, almost to be considered a joint venture. When the co-operation between the two parties includes more than just one separate logistic service and the third party adapts its business to a certain extent to his principals needs, it constitutes third party logistics. </p><p>If the logistics company, or a party employed by it, becomes insolvent when having the entrusted goods in his possession questions may arise concerning the right to the property. The company in bankruptcy in most cases has no claims of its own to the property. It is normally the creditors of the insolvent party who claim that the property ought to be a part of the bankrupt’s estate. According to the principal rule the owner of property always has the right to separation of his property. There are however several cases when thisright of separation is set aside to protect other interests. </p><p>The goods kept by the third party are very often homogenous products since one of the advantages of engaging a third party is connected to large-scale transportation or large-scale stock-keeping. In such a situation the goods can be mixed with similar goods for practical reasons. When the owner has the ability of identifying his goods among the others by presenting a mark or a separate container in which his goods are placed his right to separation remains. However, if he doesn’t have the ability to do so he loses that right and is left with nothing but a right to claim a certain value in the bankruptcy. This often means the same thing as being left with nothing. </p><p>The logistics business has developed into consisting of more than traditional logistic activities such as for example transportation. A third party logistics company often takes part in the packaging or distribution process. This way the third party sometimes becomes a part of the manufacturing chain. This has lead to another situation in which the original owner of the goods may lose his right to the goods. In spite of having contributed with all the material and instructions to manufacture a product, the principal may lose his right to the goods if they are transformed to such a large extent that they can be seen as something completely different from the material given at first. Even when the two parties have agreed that the right to the final product should be given to the original owner of the material the conflict might anyhow remain between him and the third party’s creditors. </p><p>These issues involving creditors’ claims are implied by force. Therefore there is usually no way for the outsourcing company to protect itself against them by means of a contract. One of the objects of this dissertation is to shed light upon these problems. Another object of my work is to map out the current legislation and precedent in order to evaluate it to see how well it serves its purposes.</p> Law Tredjepartslogistik Nätverkslogistik Legobearbetning Sammanblandning Sakrätt RÄTTSVETENSKAP/JURIDIK LAW/JURISPRUDENCE RÄTTSVETENSKAP/JURIDIK
5	De grundläggande rättsprinciperna vid direktupphandling : HFD 2018 ref. 60 och EU-rätten / The General Principles of Swedish Direct Awards : HFD 2018 ref. 60 and EU Law Lignell, Elias January 2022 (has links) This thesis examines the general principles in European Union (EU) public procurement law, as they apply to Swedish direct awards of low value, outside the scope of the EU procurement directives. A combination of Swedish and EU legal methodology is used to investigate two overarching themes. Firstly, the two different legal bases of the general principles, in the light of the Court of Justice of the EU’s definition of cross-border interest, as well as the Swedish implementation. Secondly, the central substantive consequences imposed by the principles on direct awards. The only national precedent on the subject, HFD 2018 ref. 60 of the Supreme Administrative Court, is both utilised and criticised against the backdrop of EU law to paint a picture of the principles’ inner workings in a direct award context. Pertaining to the first theme, an analysis of the applicability of EU primary law on direct awards is undertaken in order to distinguish the legal bases of the principles. If a contract is of certain cross-border interest, the general principles flow directly from EU law. In the absence of such an interest, the principles are exclusively based in Swedish law, which nationally extends the EU principles to all procurement (gold-plating). Overall, contracts valued below a quarter of the applicable EU directive threshold usually lack certain cross-border interest, unless there are concrete indications of the opposite. As a result, most direct awards fall outside the scope of EU law. An awareness of the legal bases of the principles is relevant to avoid breaches of EU primary law. It is argued that the Swedish gold-plated implementation of the general principles causes unnecessary uncertainty, and that separate national principles should be introduced outside the scope of EU primary law. As for the second theme, a thorough analysis concludes that the principles do not prohibit direct awards given without any exposure to competition, as long as the contracts are of low enough value. Direct awards can therefore be conducted through direct contact with a single supplier, in accordance with the legislative aims of the procedure. This may not be the case for social and other specific services of relatively high value. Nonetheless, the principles still affect direct awards, for instance in prohibiting flagrant cases of differential treatment without objective justification, based in arbitrary or corrupt decision-making. Unfortunately, these requirements are able to be circumvented due to the wide discretion given to procuring entities. On the other hand, if a direct award procedure is voluntarily advertised, the principles have greater practical significance. Still, the requirements in such cases are more lenient than in ordinary procurement procedures. public procurement government procurement direct award Sweden general principles legal principles EU law primary law CJEU ECJ certain cross-border interest threshold gold plating procedure competition low value contract offentlig upphandling upphandlingsrätt LOU LUF direktupphandling grundläggande rättsprinciper grundläggande principer allmänna principer upphandlingsrättsliga principer principer för direktupphandling upphandlingsprinciperna HFD 2018 ref. 60 EU-rätt primärrätt överskjutande implementering bestämt gränsöverskridande intresse kravet på insyn likabehandlingsprincipen icke-diskriminering proportionalitetsprincipen öppenhetsprincipen konkurrensprincipen olikbehandling likabehandling nationella principer frivillig annonsering direkttilldelning icke-direktivstyrd direktupphandlingsgräns tröskelvärde lågt värde anbudsinfordran konkurrensutsättning icke-konkurrensutsatt 19 a kap 19 a kap. 8 § rättsmedel överprövning obligatoriska krav sammanblandning EUF-fördraget FEUF EU-domstolen EU-rättslig metod rättsdogmatisk metod effet utile teleologisk tolkning affärsmässighet handlingsfrihet rättssäkerhet korruption Law Juridik Law (excluding Law and Society)

1

Page generated in 0.0679 seconds