{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2001-57",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:0931903ef5bcbef0a65f663f058354312a063e8c0b5b78e9aeba563497ae2c3e",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "RÅ 2001 ref. 57, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-ra-2001-57",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2001-57",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "RÅ 2001 ref. 57, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad domstolen sa: Skattskyldig som infriat ett borgensåtagande och därigenom fått en regressfordran mot gäldenären har ansetts ha rätt till avdrag för realisationsförlust vid avyttring av fordringen med skillnaden mellan vad som erlagts på grund av borgensåtagandet och ersättningen vid avyttringen.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Regeringsrätten, 2001."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2001-57",
  "softwareVersion": "d5167103c832f041",
  "citation": "avgorande-ra-2001-57, RÅ 2001 ref. 57, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2001-57 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:3d9cc98cdb0338ae, 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/ra-2001-57/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": "sha256:0931903ef5bcbef0a65f663f058354312a063e8c0b5b78e9aeba563497ae2c3e",
  "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": "sha256:0931903ef5bcbef0a65f663f058354312a063e8c0b5b78e9aeba563497ae2c3e",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T10:57:14.825Z",
    "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/ra-2001-57",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}