No description available.

Purpose: This study aims to identify shortcomings in the turnkey contract, to further find solutions and determine what improvements can be made to the construction process in the turnkey contract for renovations. Method: The work is based on a literature study, which is further used as a theoretical basis for the work. Interviews with project managers and clients have been carried out in collaboration with the Real Estate Office in the Fastighetskontoret in Västerås and one redevelopment project at a school within the City of Västerås was investigated. Results: Collected data from the literature regarding the turnkey contract for redevelopment constitute a theoretical basis for the work. The theoretical part is used for a comparison with data collected from the interviews and the studied project, which shows the worker’s part. The comparison focuses on large parts of a construction process which include, for and disadvantages of turnkey contracts, shortcomings that arise in the application of turnkey contracts for renovation work, the division of responsibilities over correction between the client and the contractor and views on the standard agreement ABT06. Discussion: The project studied did not have major shortcomings, but on the other hand, the work points out some shortcomings regarding communication during the work and coordination planning. No major errors are caused due to the shortcomings of the project, but it would be helpful to take those shortcomings into account to avoid those in future projects. Improvement proposals are further presented to streamline the work on new renovations within the city of Västerås with the Real Estate Office. Conclusion: The improvement proposals that the work has arrived at include instructions for customers to submit clearer tender documents to contractors, and that both partners in the work maintain good communication when needed to avoid delays and extra additional costs.

During the later half of the 20th century standard form contracts began to be used more frequently in contract situations. This trend has been consistent and in today’s world numerous commercial parties employ such contracts in their business transactions. The reasons for the extended use of standard form contracts are the benefits that can be obtained for the parties such as time efficiency, effectiveness and price advantages. Standardised contracts often regulate certain issues of the contract for example the way of delivery, remedies and complaints. The definition of such contracts is corresponding in Sweden and England as contracts containing in advance standardised terms with an aim to be used similarly in contract situations with most clients or customers. As the usage of standard form contracts increased, the number of unfair contract terms also enhanced. Therefore, the legislative powers in Sweden and England realised that the rules concerning the freedom of contract had to be restricted and governed. As a result, the legislative powers introduced an open control device through statutory control. This was done in Sweden in 1976 with the enforcement of Section 36 of the Contracts Act, and in England the year after when UCTA came into force. The statutory control in both Sweden and England makes it possible to appraise the fairness of exemption clauses. The statutory control is not identical in the two states. UCTA only concerns exclusion clauses and limitation clauses regarding contract terms and non-contractual notices. In Sweden, on the other hand, there is a general doctrine of unfairness and Section 36 of the Contracts Act can set aside all kinds of agreements. The statutory control is complemented by indirect means of controlling the content of a contract through non statutory methods. The non statutory methods are concerned with the incorporation, interpretation and construction of clauses in a contract. To be valid and for a party to be able to rely on a term it must have been incorporated into the contract. The rules concerning the interpretation of standard form contracts and exclusion clauses are also of great importance. In both states the approach held is that the statutory control should be used preferably over the indirect control means, though the indirect means still has a prominent role in England through common law. Both England and Sweden agree on that the weaker party in a contract situation is in a greater need of protection by the rules of law in unfair contract situations. However unfairness can only arise if the superior party has wrongfully used the exclusion clause. Our study shows the differences between Swedish and English contract law that can result in difficulties in the harmonisation process. These differences concern the test of reasonableness of exemption clauses, the doctrine of good faith, the legal effects and to what extent the indirect means of control should be applied. The Swedish test of reasonableness may include all relevant circumstances irrespective of the time of their occurrence, before or after the entry of the contract. The courts in England are limited to circumstances that have occurred before the closure of the contract. Section 36 of the Swedish Contracts Act includes a general rule of unfairness applicable to all kinds of contract terms. The rule of unfairness in the UCTA on the other hand, is only applicable to exemption clauses and indemnity clauses and there is no general rule of unfairness in English contract law. Instead the courts rely on indirect means of control, which therefore is of greater importance in English contract law. Finally, adjustments of unfair exemption clauses has a significant role in Swedish contract law, in contrast to English contract law where any adjustment is regarded as an intrusion of the freedom of contract. To endorse one of the most important aims of the EU; a well working inner market, discussions commenced in 2001. The discussions concerned the harmonisation of the contract law within the union. The questions that arose were whether or not it was possible at all to form a European common contract law and if so, what the effects would be. An action plan was developed by the Commission and today both the EU Parliament and the Council are positive in regard to the continuing work with a reference frame. The Commission aims to pass the reference frame in 2009. Since the EU member states are diverse and have different legal systems a harmonisation of the contract law could cause difficulties. There are differences concerning legal traditions and legal values, hence the legal expertise in Europe is divided in the harmonisation question. The following study aims to analyse the existing rules of law in Sweden and England representing two diverse legal systems existing in Europe; civil law and common law. The focus of this study regards the control of exclusion clauses in standard form contracts in both legal systems. The comparison will then be used to analyse the fundamental question if the harmonisation of contract law in the EU is feasible. Specific areas within the contract law have already been harmonised, which shows a possibility to coordinate common law and civil law. Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts is one example of harmonised contract law in the EU and the principles in PECL is another example which shows that it is possible to coordinate common law and civil law. A harmonisation of the contract law will probably promote the commerce within the union and be the next step towards one of the most prominent goals of the EU, namely a well functioning common market. However, our study shows that the differences between national legislation and the differences between the legal traditions within the EU are not insignificant and a harmonisation will probably not be enforced without difficulties.

<p>During the later half of the 20th century standard form contracts began to be used more frequently in contract situations. This trend has been consistent and in today’s world numerous commercial parties employ such contracts in their business transactions. The reasons for the extended use of standard form contracts are the benefits that can be obtained for the parties such as time efficiency, effectiveness and price advantages. Standardised contracts often regulate certain issues of the contract for example the way of delivery, remedies and complaints. The definition of such contracts is corresponding in Sweden and England as contracts containing in advance standardised terms with an aim to be used similarly in contract situations with most clients or customers.</p><p>As the usage of standard form contracts increased, the number of unfair contract terms also enhanced. Therefore, the legislative powers in Sweden and England realised that the rules concerning the freedom of contract had to be restricted and governed. As a result, the legislative powers introduced an open control device through statutory control. This was done in Sweden in 1976 with the enforcement of Section 36 of the Contracts Act, and in England the year after when UCTA came into force. The statutory control in both Sweden and England makes it possible to appraise the fairness of exemption clauses. The statutory control is not identical in the two states. UCTA only concerns exclusion clauses and limitation clauses regarding contract terms and non-contractual notices. In Sweden, on the other hand, there is a general doctrine of unfairness and Section 36 of the Contracts Act can set aside all kinds of agreements.</p><p>The statutory control is complemented by indirect means of controlling the content of a contract through non statutory methods. The non statutory methods are concerned with the incorporation, interpretation and construction of clauses in a contract. To be valid and for a party to be able to rely on a term it must have been incorporated into the contract. The rules concerning the interpretation of standard form contracts and exclusion clauses are also of great importance. In both states the approach held is that the statutory control should be used preferably over the indirect control means, though the indirect means still has a prominent role in England through common law. Both England and Sweden agree on that the weaker party in a contract situation is in a greater need of protection by the rules of law in unfair contract situations. However unfairness can only arise if the superior party has wrongfully used the exclusion clause.</p><p>Our study shows the differences between Swedish and English contract law that can result in difficulties in the harmonisation process. These differences concern the test of reasonableness of exemption clauses, the doctrine of good faith, the legal effects and to what extent the indirect means of control should be applied. The Swedish test of reasonableness may include all relevant circumstances irrespective of the time of their occurrence, before or after the entry of the contract. The courts in England are limited to circumstances that have occurred before the closure of the contract. Section 36 of the Swedish Contracts Act includes a general rule of unfairness applicable to all kinds of contract terms. The rule of unfairness in the UCTA on the other hand, is only applicable to exemption clauses and indemnity clauses and there is no general rule of unfairness in English contract law. Instead the courts rely on indirect means of control, which therefore is of greater importance in English contract law. Finally, adjustments of unfair exemption clauses has a significant role in Swedish contract law, in contrast to English contract law where any adjustment is regarded as an intrusion of the freedom of contract.</p><p>To endorse one of the most important aims of the EU; a well working inner market, discussions commenced in 2001. The discussions concerned the harmonisation of the contract law within the union. The questions that arose were whether or not it was possible at all to form a European common contract law and if so, what the effects would be. An action plan was developed by the Commission and today both the EU Parliament and the Council are positive in regard to the continuing work with a reference frame. The Commission aims to pass the reference frame in 2009. Since the EU member states are diverse and have different legal systems a harmonisation of the contract law could cause difficulties. There are differences concerning legal traditions and legal values, hence the legal expertise in Europe is divided in the harmonisation question.</p><p>The following study aims to analyse the existing rules of law in Sweden and England representing two diverse legal systems existing in Europe; civil law and common law. The focus of this study regards the control of exclusion clauses in standard form contracts in both legal systems. The comparison will then be used to analyse the fundamental question if the harmonisation of contract law in the EU is feasible. Specific areas within the contract law have already been harmonised, which shows a possibility to coordinate common law and civil law. Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts is one example of harmonised contract law in the EU and the principles in PECL is another example which shows that it is possible to coordinate common law and civil law. A harmonisation of the contract law will probably promote the commerce within the union and be the next step towards one of the most prominent goals of the EU, namely a well functioning common market. However, our study shows that the differences between national legislation and the differences between the legal traditions within the EU are not insignificant and a harmonisation will probably not be enforced without difficulties.</p>

The construction industry is constantly evolving with new products and building technical solutions. The construction industry organization jointly developed regulations known as standard contracts, or general regulations, which includes ten chapters. The standard contracts describe what the constructor industry should relate to in terms of performance and responsibility. When the standard contracts were negotiated about between the various parties in the industry some sections were developed through compromises. It is mainly in these sections misunderstandings, interpretations differences and conflicts occur. This report investigates in which sections conflicts commonly occur, what the consequences are and how the generally perception of the standard contracts is in the industry. The report also suggests solutions and improvements to the standard contracts. Eleven basic questions based on the generally perceptions of the standard contracts and the first six chapters of the standard contracts have been developed to clarify where disputes and misunderstandings may occur. The remaining four chapters have been deliberately excluded to limit the scope of this report. The content of the report is mainly based of twenty interviews with contractors and clients. The study shows that the perception of the standard contracts is positive and serves as a good tool to know what to relate to. The standard contracts should however adapt more to today's technological society. The study also presents suggestions on methods and advices that can be used to facilitate communication in the construction industry. This thesis in the Bachelor of Science in Construction Engineering at Uppsala University has carried out for ten weeks at a property company Klövern in Kista. / Byggbranschen utvecklas ständigt med nya produkter och byggtekniska lösningar vilket gör att uppförandet och förhållningssättet ändras med tiden. Branschorganisationen har gemensamt framtagit föreskrifter som benämns standardavtalen eller Allmänna bestämmelser som innefattar tio kapitel. I standardavtalen förklaras vad parterna ska förhålla sig till exempelvis vad gäller utförandet och vilket ansvar de har rent juridiskt. Det här för att undvika att parter hamnar i tvist med varandra. Man kan se standardavtalen som spelregler för byggbranschen som då vet vad man ska förhålla sig till. Då standardavtalen har förhandlats fram mellan de olika parterna i branschen innehåller de en del paragrafer som har tagits fram genom kompromisser och det är främst här missförstånd, oliktolkningar och konflikter uppstår. Den här rapporten undersöker vilka frågor som leder till att tvister vanligast uppkommer, i viss mån vad konsekvenserna blir och vidare undersöks hur synen på standardavtalen överlag ser ut i branschen. Rapporten leder fram till förslag hur standardavtalen överlag kan förbättras. Arbetet baseras på elva grundfrågeställningar kring den allmänna uppfattningen av standardavtalen samt ett antal frågor rörande bestämmelser i de sex första kapitlen i standardavtalen. Dessa har tagits fram för att klargöra vart tvister och missförstånd kan tänkas uppkomma. De resterande fyra kapitlen har medvetet uteslutits för att begränsa omfattningen i den här rapporten. Innehållet i rapporten grundar sig främst i ett tjugotal intervjuer som har genomförts med entreprenörer och beställare. Undersökningen visar att synen på standardavtalen är positiv och fungerar som ett bra verktyg för att veta vad man ska förhålla sig till. Standardavtalen bör dock anpassas till dagens tekniska samhälle. Det redovisas även förslag på metoder och råd som kan användas för att underlätta kommunikationen mellan parterna. Detta examensarbete inom högskoleingenjörsprogrammet i byggteknik på Uppsala universitet har utförts under tio veckor åt fastighetsbolaget Klövern i Kista.

No description available.

No description available.

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.