Dold samäganderätt: Är det nuvarande systemet konsekvent?
Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
The meaning of the covert co-ownership is that the parties must have intended that the property should be their common. A party must, to be able to claim ownership, have con-tributed to the acquisition financing through the financial contribution. Further shall the fact that the property should be their common be agreed or have been assumed by the par-ties. There are the circumstances for the purchase that should be considered in determining if covert co-ownership is presumed. Covert co-ownership has been established although one party only contributed a small part to the acquisition. The party with a possible loan is also considered to have acquired the property, although the party who claims to be the hidden owner is the one who pays the loan. If one of the parties has received a soft loan or a preferential price, the difference seems to be viewed as a financial contribution, which al-so applies to work on the property. The requirements for covert co-ownership of property is the same at cohabitation compared with marriage and case law in the area ends in the same result, so there is no difference for the two forms of relationship. Although the par-ties have established cohabitation agreement or marriage contract for a property have co-vert co-ownership still been considered to exist. The perception is not in that clear condi-tion which had to be expected in the current situation. The fact that case law does not al-ways reach the same result also shows that there are no clear conditions to follow for when the covert co-ownership shall be deemed to be achieved, despite the requirements estab-lished.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. , 34 p.
Dold samäganderätt, Sambo, Äktenskap
Law (excluding Law and Society)
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-15103OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-15103DiVA: diva2:419412
UppsokSocial and Behavioural Science, Law