{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2018-s-957",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:762bbe6d7da653e3a18457f4670b0c5b86dcedbb3525b1f51c65b880cc0d20a0",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "NJA 2018 s. 957, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-nja-2018-s-957",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2018-s-957",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "NJA 2018 s. 957, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad som hände: Bryssel I-förordningen.",
    "Vad domstolen sa: Svensk domsrätt har inte ansetts föreligga, trots att en behörighetsinvändning framställts senare än vad som följer av 34 kap. 2 § rättegångsbalken.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Högsta domstolen, 2018."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2018-s-957",
  "softwareVersion": "2c155efecf6b330d",
  "citation": "avgorande-nja-2018-s-957, NJA 2018 s. 957, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-2018-s-957 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:8b117a8e54ae3b57, 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-2018-s-957/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": "sha256:762bbe6d7da653e3a18457f4670b0c5b86dcedbb3525b1f51c65b880cc0d20a0",
  "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": "sha256:762bbe6d7da653e3a18457f4670b0c5b86dcedbb3525b1f51c65b880cc0d20a0",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T11:06:06.783Z",
    "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-2018-s-957",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}