In this chapter, the systems of Corporate Criminal Liability in four Nordic jurisdictions are examined, as interesting examples of the challenges - and possibilities - of Corporate Criminal Liability. It is argued that a credible model of attributing action to the company must be established, if a criminal sanction against a company is to be understood as a punishment in the sense that it attributes blame. In that regard, attribution can be based either on identification or on a concept of corporate negligence. Identification, where the actions of a representative of a company are attributed directly to the company, does not offer any considerable normative challenges. When corporate negligence is considered, however, the Nordic countries differ in an interesting way. Denmark and Norway share a system of primary corporate criminal liability, where the actions of several individuals can be cumulated and attributed to the company in a way where the company appears to be a genuine actor. Once cumulated, there is very limited room for the company to argue that it has not acted negligently. Sweden and Finland, on the other hand, in principle understand Corporate Criminal Liability as accessory to the crimes of individuals. In order to attribute such crimes, a test of corporate negligence is then employed, where it is determined whether the company has negligently failed to prevent the crimes of the individuals. While the accessory solution in Sweden and Finland appears to be an unnecessary limitation, the negligence test employed in those jurisdictions appears as an interesting model for understanding what it might mean to attribute blame to a company in the Criminal Law, and, in a deeper sense, for a concept of corporate guilt.

År 2024 är lag (1924:323) om verkan av avtal, som slutits under påverkan av en psykisk störning 100 år. Trots lagens ålder och det faktum att den alltjämt tillämpas i domstolarna, finns få rättsvetenskapliga analyser av lagen. I denna festskrift till lagens 100-årsjubileum analyseras och diskuteras frågor relaterade till lagen av forskare i rättsvetenskap och praktiskt verksamma jurister. 

AG Kokott recently gave her Opinion on the ongoing saga between the European Commission and Google. She advised the Court to dismiss all of Google’s grounds of appeal against the judgment of the General Court which upheld the Commission’s decision to fine Google €2.4 billion. In her Opinion, AG Kokott raises and answers questions that ‘are of great legal and practical importance’ (para 2). In particular, the AG considers ‘self-preferencing’, ie. where a dominant firm favours its services over those of rivals, to be an independent form of abuse. This means this type of prohibited conduct under Article 102 TFEU has its own separate criteria for application. Importantly, these do not include the strict indispensability test akin to that found in Bronner which requires that rivals have no alternatives to the input of the dominant firm. Not applying Bronner greatly facilitates the finding of an abuse under article 102 TFEU.

Furthermore, with regard to the notion of competition on the merits, it is considered that in certain circumstances, where a dominant online platform decides to alter its business model from offering a fundamentally open infrastructure to offering a more restricted infrastructure, this may not constitute normal competition. The Opinion also finds that the ‘as efficient competitor’ (‘AEC’) principlewhich provides that article 102 TFEU only protects competitors as efficient as the dominant firm, and the AEC test, which is one way of implementing the principle, are not relevant in cases involving super dominant firms like Google. This is because in markets with super dominant firms (e.g. over 90% market share) and high barriers to entry, less efficient competitors may play an important role. The AEC test is also not relevant when the conduct concerns non-price abuses thus potentially eliminating its role in a self-preferencing assessment all together. If this Opinion is endorsed by the Court, it will give competition authorities across the EU the necessary legal criteria and guidance on how to address self-preferencing as an independent abuse under article 102 TFEU. However, there are still aspects of the legal test that remain unclear and must be addressed going forward.

This chapter reviews the basic principles of the mechanisms that govern the life of an award in investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) after it was rendered, in particular annulment and set-aside. It analyses the similarities and differences between the two review procedures in terms of preserving the finality of an award as an essential feature of ISDS, while considering competing policy considerations. It first examines annulment according to Article 52 of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention) and the performance of the ad hoc committees in their role as guardians of both the arbitral process and the finality of awards. It then briefly compares this ‘tailor-made’ review mechanism with the set-aside procedure for non-ICSID awards under domestic arbitration law at the seat of arbitration in domestic courts. Finally, the chapter reflects on the general increase in challenges to awards in recent years and the implications for ‘finality’ in ISDS.

I AD 2023 nr 71 behandlas för första gången i svenska prejudikatinstanser frågan om en arbetsgivares policy om att arbetstagare i arbetet är förbjudna att bära religiösa, politiska och filosofiska symboler. Målet rör en arbetstagare som önskade bära hijab i arbetet som trygghetsvärd i kollektivtrafiken i Stockholms län. Liknande frågor har tidigare behandlats i EU-domstolen och Europadomstolen. JP Infonets expert Erik Grahn analyserar här domen och dess förhållande till tidigare praxis.

Justice may be nearing its end with the advent of artificial intelligence. The ubiquitous penetration of AI, reinforced by its gaining legitimacy in non -obvious ways, is leading to a shift in the way humans perceive and apply the principles of justice. AI is incapable of truly understanding and interpreting the law, properly justifying decisions, or balancing rights and interests, which escapes public attention as people are excessively focused on its perceived perfection. Difficult to control, AI entails significant dependency of public institutions on private actors. Without undermining artificial intelligence as such, the article is calling to seriously rethink how far we are ready to go along this path.

Betsson ska betala tillbaka närmare 6 miljoner kronor till en spelberoende man, efter år av spelande på bolagets nätkasino – det följer, menar Patent- och marknadsöverdomstolen, av 33 § avtalslagen. Har denna bestämmelse, som många sett som en irrelevant artefakt, nu plötsligt fått liv? Joel Samuelsson ger sin analys med fokus på bland annat principen om obehörig vinst, ond tros-rekvisitet och bestämmelsens relation till generalklausulen i 36 § avtalslagen.

Fastän borgen är en vanlig säkerhetsform är den mycket sparsamt reglerad i lag. De flesta av reglerna har vuxit fram i ett samspel mellan rättsvetenskap och en omfattande rättspraxis. Boken ger en tämligen ingående, om än inte heltäckande beskrivning av denna säkerhetsform. Framställningen är upplagd så att den i huvudsak följer förloppet från det att borgen ingås till dess att den tas i anspråk och avvecklas genom regress och slutlig fördelning av ansvar. Reglerna om borgensmannens förpliktelser, vilka skyldigheter borgenären har mot borgensmannen samt möjligheten att vända sig med regresskrav mot gäldenären eller mot andra som gått i borgen behandlas utförligt. Även borgensmannens ställning vid konkurs, företagsrekonstruktion och utsökning beskrivs. Avslutningsvis behandlas frågor om lagval och forumval liksom vissa processuella frågor.

Boken är främst skriven för att användas i undervisning på juristutbildningar där djupare kunskaper om borgen och närliggande säkerhetsformer såsom bankgarantier och tredjemanspant eftersträvas, men den vänder sig också till praktiskt verksamma jurister som behöver få en översikt över ämnet.

(Från bokens baksidestext)

I artikeln undersöks förutsättningarna för ogiltighet på grund av bristande rättshandlingsförmåga till följd av psykisk störning i relation till viljefelen svek och ocker. Samtliga dessa tre grunder för ogiltighet relateras sedan till förmögenhetsbrotten bedrägeri och ocker. Ett centralt syfte är att undersöka hur de civilrättsliga ogiltighetsreglerna och de båda straffbestämmelserna kan belysa varandra. Straffrättsligt material används för analysen av ogiltighetsgrunderna och tvärtom.

Genomgående ställs två frågor. Den första handlar om hur en rättshandling måste kunna knytas till ett visst tillstånd hos den rättshandlande eller agerande från motparten för att ogiltighet eller straffansvar ska kunna bli aktuellt enligt respektive bestämmelse. Den andra handlar om i vilken utsträckning en rättshandling måste få någon typ av negativa ekonomiska konsekvenser för att ogiltighet eller straffansvar ska kunna aktualiseras.

En fördjupad bild av rättsreglerna framträder. Det går då att identifiera en betydande överensstämmelse i flera delar mellan svek och bedrägeri samt mellan civilt och straffrättsligt ocker. Däremot saknas i stor utsträckning straffrättsliga motsvarigheter till de utnyttjandesituationer som faller utanför svek och ocker, utan snarare kan medföra ogiltighet enligt 1924 års lag eller 33 § avtalslagen. Detta framstår problematiskt både ur rättstillämpningssynpunkt och som avgränsning av det kriminaliserade området.

Predictability of legal decisions is usually considered a prerequisite for the rule of law, following the maxim ‘like cases should be treated alike’. Yet, this presupposes that the case outcome can be predicted based on the merits of the case, rather than other factors. The purpose of this study was to test whether and to what extent legal decisions on petitions for new criminal trials can be predicted on the basis of other fairly superficial criteria that one could access without even reading the case file, e.g. which Court decided, whether the applicant had legal representation etc. To this end, all petitions for new criminal trials submitted to the Swedish Supreme Court and the six Courts of Appeal in the time period 2010–2020 (n = 3915) were reviewed. This data formed the basis of a regression model which was then used to predict decisions regarding petitions in 2021. On the basis of access to legal representation and crime type, the regression model predicted accurately 100 % of the decisions made in 2021. This raises questions about the evidentiary basis for the decisions and also the role of judges in situations where their decisions are fully predictable.

Recently, the concept of the ‘European digital legal order’ seems to have gained more importance than the overarching concept of European legal order, of which the former is arguably a modern manifestation. The European legal order traditionally entails a set of fundamental human rights, Rule of Law principles and Democratic values as enshrined in the multinational legal order. From maintaining the Rule of Law derive the sustainability of Democratic values, and freedoms under the law enshrined in fundamental human rights. To the extent that the European digital legal order is the manifestation of the European legal order in the modern digital world, the fundamental question of the nature, scope and upholding of fundamental human rights, Rule of Law principles and Democratic values remains. Without disputing the need for digital transformation and its proper regulation, this paper will turn its attention to the current status of fundamental principles in the modern setting of democratic societies.

Artificial Intelligence or Artificial Intelligence Systems are technologies that have and will have a serious impact on the European legal order at large. Without dismissing the value of a human-centered regulatory approach in the field of AI, in this paper we discuss why this may be difficult as digitisation and algorithmisation deepen. This paper reviews the regulatory framework of AI and proposes potential new/renewed/modernised rights that should enhance and/or supplement the current catalogue of fundamental human rights, as contained inter alia in the EU Charter and the ECHR. This paper also argues that regulatory standards regarding AI should be clearer and stronger as well as suggests a new wording of some standards. The particular new rights and/or their new wording will be suggested in the paper.

This concluding chapter explores how the various contributions to this volume can help us understand the challenges as well as the opportunities that technological and scientific developments entail for the management of marine resources and how the preconditions for such management have changed through the adoption of the BBNJ Agreement, as well as the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework of 2022. It also identifies issues that have not received sufficient consideration, even in these recent agreements, such as the contribution of the oceans and marine ecosystems to carbon sequestration and climate change abatement, and how this vital ecosystem function may be protected or enhanced by further policy reform.

Artificially generated informational outputs of generative ML models are called synthetic. Synthetic data is output that has analytic value for research or AI-model creation. Synthetic media is informational output that is consumed as content. Synthetic data are believed to be a promising solution to overcoming privacy, data scarcity and bias concerns. The value of synthetic data in relation to these problems depends on the context. Synthetic media come in three categories: lawful, ‘lawful but awful,’ and illegal. Synthetic content can be regulated in legal or technical ways, or through human content verification.

Keywords  

Synthetic data; synthetic media; deepfakes; generative AI; regulation of synthetic outputs.

Straffrättsliga regler om givande och tagande av muta har funnits länge. Genom att Sverige tillträdde Europarådets civilrättsliga konvention om korruption (ETS 174) finns nu också ett regelverk för att hantera de civilrättsliga verkningarna av att ett avtal har uppkommit under inflytande av korruptionshandlingar. I bidraget behandlas frågan vad det innebär för ett avtals giltighet att det tillkommit till följd av mutor eller bestickning och vilken betydelse det har om avtalet till innehållet påverkats av korruptionshandlingarna. Lagstiftaren har förordat att avvecklingen av sådana avtal skall ske efter det mönster som utvecklats i anslutning till 33 § avtalslagen eller att det bör jämkas med stöd av 36 § avtalslagen. Vid en närmare granskning visar sig dessa lagregler emellertid vara otillräckliga. I bidraget förordas istället att rättsverkningarna av att avtalet tillkommit under inflytande av korruptionshandlingar skall följa mönstret då osedliga avtal ogiltigförklaras och avvecklas.

Social media platforms are increasingly important arenas for communication in today’s society. These platforms can both enable and restrict their users’ exercise of free speech. The right to freedom of expression has traditionally protected individuals against state interference. However, the most popular social media platforms are owned by private companies, which creates new challenges for the constitutional protection of freedom of expression. This study examines how constitutional free speech rights have been adapted and should be adapted to the new communicative landscape dominated by social media.

A comparative study of the adaption of constitutional free speech guarantees to social media in the US, Sweden and Germany is carried out. Relevant European law (European Convention on Human Rights and European Union law) is also included in the comparison. Four dimensions of the exercise of free speech on social media are compared. Firstly, social media users' and platforms' free speech rights are studied. Secondly, it is analysed whether constitutional free speech rights can be applied to relationships between private social media platforms and their users (horizontal effect). Thirdly, the state’s potential positive obligations to protect users' freedom of expression against social media companies are examined. Finally, laws regulating the effects of social media platforms on free speech exercise are addressed, including the Digital Services Act adopted by the European Union.

Through the comparative analysis, different constitutional law mechanisms that allow freedom of expression to impact relationships between private social media platforms and their users are identified. Constitutional free speech guarantees can affect the activities of social media platforms through the horizontal effect of constitutional rights or the state’s positive obligations. Even without horizontal effect and positive obligations, the constitutional free speech law may allow the state to regulate platforms’ power over free speech through ordinary laws. It is argued that regardless of which of these constitutional law mechanisms is used, it is necessary to balance competing free speech interests of speakers, audience, platforms and society against each other. Guidelines for weighing the various free speech interests against each other are presented in the last chapter of the dissertation. It is suggested, among other things, that democracy should be chosen as the guiding free speech value for such a balancing exercise.

In this 2018 decision, the Colombian Supreme Court considered that deforestation in the Colombian Amazon contributed significantly to climate change and therefore violated the constitutional environmental rights of future generations, as embodied by the young people who brought the case. Further, it recognized the Colombian Amazon as a subject of rights, with the rights to protection, conservation, maintenance and restoration. In its decision, the Court ordered the state and other organizational defendants to take several innovative measures intended to stop deforestation. It ordered the Presidency of the Republic, the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, and other regional and municipal bodies to issue action plans to address deforestation and reduce the impact of climate change. It also ordered the Presidency of the Republic, the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development to formulate an "intergenerational pact for the life of the Colombian Amazon", together with the plaintiffs, impacted communities, scientists, and other interested persons including the general public, with a goal of reducing climate change, and reducing deforestation to zero. Importantly, this case made explicit the link between climate change, the rights of children, the rights of future generations, and the rights of nature.

This article analyses shifts and continuities in Swedish regulation of information sharing in identity-release donor conception. At a time when families include both solo and same-sex parenting, I draw on a practice-oriented method to compare legal and pre-legislative documents from the early 1980s with those of the late 2010s as developed in a Swedish national context. Following the turn to openness in donor conception, I discuss the practical implications of framing access to information from the hospitals' so-called 'special medical record' as a children's right, when information is in fact only available after 'maturity' is reached. Furthermore, I show how a significant change in the understanding of child–parent relationships in donor-conceived families is articulated in the 2019 legislation. If early policy documents portrayed donor-conceived children as potentially problematic for not 'knowing their origin', I argue that now it is parents in donor-conceived families who are constructed as potentially problematic. Drawing on critical kinship theory, I conclude that Swedish policy-making on information sharing in donor conception relies on a symbolic rather than material understanding of genetic relatedness that fails to acknowledge how different family forms might have different needs. Based on these findings, I suggest that policymakers take into account the implications a changing view on family life and genetics have for children and parents following donor conception.

The purpose of this pedagogical project, named “Double command everything”, was the development and implementation of a distinct pedagogical philosophy for the new Master’s Programme in International and European Law and Business, in short Law & Business (60 credits). The main foundation and pedagogical idea of the programme in Law & Business is integrated interdisciplinary teaching in order to enhance student learning and prepare students for work in international and European business.

Discrimination in healthcare is a pervasive issue faced by patients, affecting their access to treatment and overall well-being. This article examines the forms of healthcare discrimination recognised by Scandinavian equality boards through a comparative analysis of their decisions. While social science studies have established the existence of discrimination based on ethnicity, race, gender, sexuality, and age, proving such discrimination in legal terms poses significant challenges. An analysis of board decisions reveals that patients face barriers in establishing legally actionable discrimination, as perceived discriminatory conduct may not meet the criteria for legal claims. Additionally, equality boards are often hesitant to intervene in medical decision-making processes, further complicating the path to legal recourse. Lack of evidentiary support, especially in cases of unconscious bias, makes it difficult for some patients to substantiate claims of discrimination. The findings underscore the complexities of addressing healthcare discrimination through legal means. To effectively combat discrimination, there is a need to clarify the goals of discrimination law in the healthcare context and consider its future application within the broader context of human rights and equality.

 2023 marked thirty years since European Union citizenship was introduced as the Treaty of Maastricht entered into force. Celebrated as the world’s first “transnational legal status”, yet a complement to nationality, the status entails rights that have been expanded, modified, re-interpreted, against the background of the economic integration process. Criticisms against European Union citizenship frequently focus its exclusionary nature, often in relation to economic factors. This offers the springboard from which we started to reflect in pulling together this special issue.

The articles presented in this special issue are the result of a conference held 22–23 November 2022 in Uppsala, Sweden, entitled European Citizens Thirty Years On: Economic Contributors, Political Members, Right-holders?

The conference offered an important occasion to reflect on, and assess, the past three decades of Union citizenship with the understanding that citizenship has to be grasped in opposition to different forms of exclusion – legal, political and social. Different disciplinary outlooks were thus taken into account. Its aim was, more specifically, to assess the three decades of Union citizen- ship against the backdrop of the revival of interest in economic contributions and the role these ought to play in attribution of social roles and political power. We therefore asked whether economic contributions matter more, and what this means for citizenship, and European Union citizenship in particular.

Det sätt på vilket rättsstaten stegvis monteras ner i några av EU:s medlemsstater utgör ett allvarligt hot mot de värden som ligger till grund för det europeiska samarbetet och det gemensamma rättssystem som är tänkt att främja dem. Parallellt till försök att på politisk väg stoppa utvecklingen blir konkreta konflikter fortlöpande föremål för rättslig prövning i EU-domstolen. Detta bokprojekt undersöker den pågående utvecklingen rörande rättsstatsprincipen i Europa med fokus på att beskriva och analysera hur frågan om nationella domstolars oberoende hanteras inom unionsrätten.

Hybrid mismatches, where differences in income characterisation across jurisdictions lead to double non-taxation, can be exploited by multinational enterprises to reduce their overall tax burden. Common hybrid mismatch rules addressing this issue have recently been introduced within the EU and the OECD. The adoption of these rules is unprecedented and poses a novelty for many states’ national tax systems. Beyond being technically complex, the operation of these rules necessitates interactions with other anti-avoidance rules, tax treaty provisions, EU law, OECD guidelines, and national rules in foreign jurisdictions.

This thesis makes a significant contribution through its extensive structural examination of hybrid mismatches and their rules, covering both EU and tax treaty law. The examination primarily focuses on the hybrid mismatch rules in EU secondary law and their interactions with other aspects of EU and tax treaty law in preventing such mismatches. The analysis is conducted within the context of the rules’ underlying objectives.

The study highlights five formal objectives of the rules: preventing tax avoidance, neutrality, equity, administrability, and legal certainty. However, a critical examination reveals that these objectives often lack substance or resemble political slogans. Several structural premises contributing to the occurrence of hybrid mismatches are identified, including the general trend of reducing or eliminating withholding taxes within EU and tax treaty law. While the hybrid mismatch rules play a crucial role in preventing mismatches, their complex design and technical limitations render them vulnerable to circumvention. Another issue is that they often risk resulting in unresolved double taxation when interacting with other parts of EU and tax treaty law. Ultimately, the rules are primarily focused on preventing tax avoidance but tend to overlook other objectives. The study particularly advocates for improved administrability and legal certainty.