{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2012-s-476","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2012-s-476)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-09-26","fingerprint":"ewai:eu:950d3c","proof":"sha256:fc39ac6c8d2a074ebf3a325c4c96e4dccd63ebbf394ace29349ec2f1781cf74a","jurisdiction":"eu"},"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"SoftwareApplication","applicationCategory":"LegalService","name":"NJA 2012 s. 476, beslutsagent","identifier":"avgorande-nja-2012-s-476","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2012-s-476","inLanguage":"sv","about":"NJA 2012 s. 476, beslutsagent","abstract":["Vad som hände: Tillstånd till prövning i hovrätt av mål som inrymmer fråga av prejudikatintresse men där hovrättens fortsatta prövning också kommer att röra många andra frågor. (Samma dag och med samma utgång avgjordes mål Ö 5678-11 mellan samma parter).","Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Högsta domstolen, 2012."],"isBasedOn":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2012-s-476","softwareVersion":"ef4a703550f745df","citation":"avgorande-nja-2012-s-476, NJA 2012 s. 476, beslutsagent. NovaCopilot, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2012-s-476 (hämtad 2026-09-05, bevis sha256:cea182744ce65196, bygge legal-2026-09-26).","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-2012-s-476/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:fc39ac6c8d2a074ebf3a325c4c96e4dccd63ebbf394ace29349ec2f1781cf74a","version":"legal-2026-09-26","expires":"2026-09-27T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-09-26+legal-2026-09-26+2026-09-26T04:32:28","content_hash":"sha256:fc39ac6c8d2a074ebf3a325c4c96e4dccd63ebbf394ace29349ec2f1781cf74a","revalidate_after":"2026-09-26T05:35:27.942Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","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-2012-s-476","usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/node-agents/avgorande/nja-2012-s-476/ai.json","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"}}