Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Vem dömer i gråzonen?: Domstolsprövning i gränslandet mellan offentlig rätt och privaträtt
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Law.
2009 (Swedish)Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)Alternative title
Who judges in the twilight zone?  : Adjudication in the borderland between public law and private law (English)
Abstract [en]

The starting point of this thesis is the assertion that the interaction between individuals and public authorities sometimes produces claims which cannot easily be categorized as public or private law claims – “claims in the twilight zone”. The aims of the thesis are to examine to what extent such claims can be determined by a court of law and to establish to which kind of court such a claim is properly to be submitted. Moreover, assuming that there is a division of competence between the general courts and the administrative courts that purport to “cut through” claims in the twilight zone, the thesis examines three specific interests: 1) the interest of effective adjudication of claims in the twilight zone; 2) the interest of upholding the division of competence between the general courts and the administrative courts; and 3) the interest of avoiding parallel decisions on the same subject matter.

     There is much to support the conclusion that claims in the twilight zone have hitherto, with a couple of important exceptions, been adjudicated in the general courts. However, certain ambiguities relating to the proper role of the administrative courts make it uncertain whether this can still be said to be the case. It may perhaps be that the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court have divergent conceptions of the meaning and effect of a decision made by an administrative court. The present uncertainty makes it difficult to establish to which kind of court a claim in the twilight zone is properly to be submitted, and there is a certain risk that such a claim will not be possible to pursue through a judicial process at all. There is also a certain risk that new boundary lines between public law and private law will be created as a result of procedural ambiguities and not as a result of clear standpoints in matters of substantial law. It is suggested that the situation should be remedied by clarifying the proper role of the administrative courts – or by an amalgamation of the general courts and the administrative courts to one single court system.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Iustus Förlag AB , 2009. , 644 p.
Skrifter från Juridiska institutionen vid Umeå universitet, ISSN 1404-9198 ; 20
Keyword [en]
Administrative Procedure, Civil Procedure, Public Law, Private Law, Enforcement, Twilight Zone, Adjudication
Keyword [sv]
Förvaltningsprocess, Civilprocess, Gråzon, Kompetensfördelning, Allmän domstol, Förvaltningsdomstol
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-26521ISBN: 978-91-7678-733-5OAI: diva2:271690
Juridik, 90187, Umeå
Public defence
2009-12-11, Hörsal C, Samhällsvetarhuset, Umeå universitet, Umeå, 10:15 (Swedish)
Available from: 2009-11-19 Created: 2009-10-13 Last updated: 2009-11-19Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(7233 kB)3332 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 7233 kBChecksum SHA-512
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Södergren, Patrik
By organisation
Department of Law
Law (excluding Law and Society)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 3332 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 6426 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link