{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-1984-s-229",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:5c5c06a50b2938b41dab303837096e1df7e90bc59f6bde87e1fd9474174603f8",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "NJA 1984 s. 229, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-nja-1984-s-229",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-1984-s-229",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "Fråga huruvida villkoret med tillämpning av 36 § avtalslagen skulle lämnas utan avseende",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad som hände: Ett avtal om företagsförsäkring innehåller villkor om att vid tvist om värdet av skada på egendom värderingen på begäran av part skall hänskjutas till avgörande av skiljemän.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Högsta domstolen, 1984. Tillämpar Avtalslagen."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-1984-s-229",
  "softwareVersion": "b3ed2bb6fa4db21b",
  "citation": "avgorande-nja-1984-s-229, NJA 1984 s. 229, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-1984-s-229 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:02d69317bb142bf2, bygge legal-2026-08-25).",
  "disclaimer": "Källhänvisning med officiell identifierare. Ingen juridisk rådgivning och inget efterlevnadsbeslut.",
  "potentialAction": {
    "@type": "SearchAction",
    "target": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/node-agents/avgorande/nja-1984-s-229/run?{&samma_lagrum,samma_instans,avgorande_ar_senare}"
  },
  "language": "sv",
  "source_language": "sv",
  "text_language": "sv",
  "available_languages": [
    "sv",
    "en",
    "no",
    "de"
  ],
  "translated_views": [
    "manifest.json",
    "ai.json"
  ],
  "source_only_views": [
    "script.json",
    "run",
    "monitor.json",
    "verify"
  ],
  "translated": false,
  "hash": "sha256:5c5c06a50b2938b41dab303837096e1df7e90bc59f6bde87e1fd9474174603f8",
  "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
  "expires": "2026-08-31T00:00:00.000Z",
  "dependency": {
    "index_version": "legal-2026-08-25+legal-2026-08-25+2026-08-25T10:00:00",
    "content_hash": "sha256:5c5c06a50b2938b41dab303837096e1df7e90bc59f6bde87e1fd9474174603f8",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T06:15:28.251Z",
    "max_copy_age_seconds": 3600,
    "policy": "revalidate-required; live-fetch-per-answer; attribution-required; no-derived-index",
    "changelog": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency",
    "verify": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify",
    "stale_copy_invalid": true
  },
  "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-1984-s-229",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}