Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Operational message
There are currently operational disruptions. Troubleshooting is in progress.
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Södergren, Patrik
Publications (5 of 5) Show all publications
Madell, T. & Södergren, P. (2024). Offentlig rätt i allmän domstol 2002-2006. Förvaltningsrättslig Tidskrift (2), 131-159
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Offentlig rätt i allmän domstol 2002-2006
2024 (Swedish)In: Förvaltningsrättslig Tidskrift, ISSN 0015-8585, no 2, p. 131-159Article in journal (Other academic) Published
National Category
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-235734 (URN)
Available from: 2025-02-20 Created: 2025-02-20 Last updated: 2025-09-30Bibliographically approved
Södergren, P. (2011). Domstolsprövning i gråzonen, saklig kompetensfördelning och förvaltningsprocessens funktion -  en fristående uppföljare till en bokanmälan. Förvaltningsrättslig Tidskrift, 74(2), 353-372
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Domstolsprövning i gråzonen, saklig kompetensfördelning och förvaltningsprocessens funktion -  en fristående uppföljare till en bokanmälan
2011 (Swedish)In: Förvaltningsrättslig Tidskrift, ISSN 0015-8585, Vol. 74, no 2, p. 353-372Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Förvaltningsrättslig tidskrift, 2011
National Category
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-49311 (URN)
Available from: 2011-11-08 Created: 2011-11-08 Last updated: 2018-06-08Bibliographically approved
Södergren, P. (2009). Vem dömer i gråzonen?: Domstolsprövning i gränslandet mellan offentlig rätt och privaträtt. (Doctoral dissertation). Uppsala: Iustus Förlag AB
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Vem dömer i gråzonen?: Domstolsprövning i gränslandet mellan offentlig rätt och privaträtt
2009 (Swedish)Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
Alternative title[en]
Who judges in the twilight zone?  : Adjudication in the borderland between public law and private law
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. p. 644
Series
Skrifter från Juridiska institutionen vid Umeå universitet, ISSN 1404-9198 ; 20
Keywords
Administrative Procedure, Civil Procedure, Public Law, Private Law, Enforcement, Twilight Zone, Adjudication, Förvaltningsprocess, Civilprocess, Gråzon, Kompetensfördelning, Allmän domstol, Förvaltningsdomstol
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Research subject
civil and criminal procedural law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-26521 (URN)978-91-7678-733-5 (ISBN)
Distributor:
Juridik, 90187, Umeå
Public defence
2009-12-11, Hörsal C, Samhällsvetarhuset, Umeå universitet, Umeå, 10:15 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2009-11-19 Created: 2009-10-13 Last updated: 2018-06-08Bibliographically approved
Södergren, P. (2007). Den förvaltningsprocessuella prövningsramen och civilrätten. Förvaltningsrättslig tidskrift (4/2007), 375-396
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Den förvaltningsprocessuella prövningsramen och civilrätten
2007 (Swedish)In: Förvaltningsrättslig tidskrift, ISSN 0015-8585, no 4/2007, p. 375-396Article in journal (Other academic) Published
National Category
Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-8724 (URN)
Available from: 2008-02-20 Created: 2008-02-20 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved
Södergren, P. (2002). Europakonventionen, rättsprövning och 22 a § förvaltningslagen: obefintliga problem får sin lösning?. Förvaltningsrättslig Tidskrift, 207-220
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Europakonventionen, rättsprövning och 22 a § förvaltningslagen: obefintliga problem får sin lösning?
2002 (Swedish)In: Förvaltningsrättslig Tidskrift, ISSN 0015-8585, p. 207-220Article in journal (Other academic) Published
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-17251 (URN)
Available from: 2007-11-07 Created: 2007-11-07 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications