The interpretation of a will is indeed a delicate matter. The government committee that developed the Wills Act (SFS 1930:104) described it as an area that ”offers particular difficulties”. When there is a will to be executed, however, the difficulties must be overcome. Frequently, a great deal of time has elapsed since the will was written, which may have led to several changes in different regards. For example, the testator may no longer be in possession of the property named in the will, or changes in the circle of legatees might have occured. When a will is to be interpreted, one must identify the actual underlying intent of the provision. If that is not possible, the executor must ask what the testator’s hypothetical intent would be in the particular situation. Hence, the interpretation process is strictly subjective. If, and only if, the determination of the actual or hypothetical intent of the testator is unsuccessful can one use supplementary presumptions. The Wills Act, which was incorporated almost unmodified into the Inheritance Code (SFS 1958:637), offers a few presumption rules that ”the normal testator” is presumed to approve. This phase of the interpretation is therefore objective. The presumption rules are subsidiary to the actual or hypothetical intent of the testator and ought only be used as an exception. The Supreme Court has, in accordance with this principle of subsidiarity, seldom applied a presumption rule. The court seems to prefer an interpretation of the testator’s intent, even if the intent is rather vague. The court’s case law shows that it does not take much to rebut one of the subsidiary presumptions. Due to the continuing development of society and its constellation of families, the need for development in the law of wills is likewise perpetual. Cohabitants, for example, do not inherit one another according to Swedish law, and thus it is crucial to make a will in favour of a cohabitant to provide for their protection. This paper does not propose a right of inheritance for cohabitants, but rather a presumption rule under specific circumstances: An explicit provision for free disposal of the property left for the surviving cohabitant is presumed to contain a provision for secondary inheritance due to the 3rd chapter of the Inheritance Code. Such a presumption would harmonise with established law and hopefully prevent future interpretation disputes.

Presumtionsreglerna i 11 kap. ÄB får anses vara ett hjälpmedel vid tolkning av testamenten som i sig inte ger tillräcklig ledning för vad testatorn avsett ska hända med sin kvarlåtenskap. Dessa presumtionsregler är tänkta att ge uttryck för vad testatorer i allmänhet vill ska hända med sitt arv efter sin bortgång i specifika situationer. Att reglerna ska ge uttryck för vad den ”genomsnittlige” testatorn vill innebär att reglernas utformning måste vara av generell karaktär. I denna uppsats utreder vi presumtionsregeln i 11 kap. 5 § ÄB som behandlar panträttsbelastade saklegat. Arbetet är avgränsat till att enbart behandla det fall då en fastighet har pantsatts och belånats för att finansiera uppförandet av en byggnad på ofri grund. Uppsatsen framställer en kritisk syn på utformningen av nu nämnda presumtionsregel enligt gällande rätt. För att utreda och peka på brister i gällande rätt används en deskriptiv metod, vilket är en förutsättning för den kommande analysen som undersöker möjligheten till en förändring av presumtionsregeln i fråga. Rättsläget analyseras sedermera med hjälp av en analytisk och problemorienterad metod. I denna del av uppsatsen inventeras argument för och emot de framlagda förslagen till förändring, varefter argumenten vägs mot varandra. På grundval av argumentationen tar författarna ställning till huruvida varje enskilt förslag är möjligt att genomföra. Resultatet av analysen är att införandet av ett andra stycke till presumtionsregeln i 11 kap. 5 § ÄB är det mest lämpliga alternativet för att lösa den problematik som behandlas. Ett sådant stycke skulle tydligt stadga vem som ska bära panträttsbelastningen vid testatorns bortgång för det fall att testatorn har pantsatt en fastighet för att finansiera uppförandet av en byggnad på ofri grund. / The rules of presumption in chapter 11 of the Swedish Inheritance Code are to be considered as an aid in the interpretation of wills, if the will itself does not provide sufficient guidance for what the deviser intended to happen with his legacy. These rules of presumption are meant to express what a deceased person in general would want to happen with his legacy in specific situations. The rules of presumption have to be of a general nature in order to represent the average deceased persons intentions. The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the rule of presumption given in chapter 11. 5 § of the Swedish Inheritance Code concerning estate with an attached mortgage lien which the deviser in his will has left to a specific legatee. This thesis is limited to only treat the case where a mortgage lien on property is deposited as security for a loan in order to finance the construction of a building on leasehold. The thesis presents a critical view of the design of the aforementioned rule of presumption according to current legislation. In order to investigate and identify shortcomings in current law, a descriptive method is used, which is a prerequisite for future analysis that examines the possibility of a change of the rule of presumption in question.The legal position is analyzed with an analytical approach. In this part of the thesis, arguments for and against the proposals of change are being evaluated. On the basis of these arguments, the authors consider whether each proposal is possible to implement or not. The result of the analysis is that the introduction of a subparagraph to the rule of presumption in chapter 11. 5 § of the Swedish Inheritance Code is the most suitable option to solve the issues being treated in the thesis. Such a subparagraph would clearly state which one of the legatees who is obligated to carry the burden of the mortgage lien attached to the property that has been deposited in order to finance the construction of a building on leasehold.