{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2004-55",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:3c7277f50feecdc431ceed34ec1caa07af78242c485fcce39154c206142543bf",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "RÅ 2004 ref. 55, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-ra-2004-55",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2004-55",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "RÅ 2004 ref. 55, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad domstolen sa: Naturvårdslagens regler har ansetts tillämpliga på ett föreläggande om stängselgenombrott som meddelats före miljöbalkens ikraftträdande, trots att frågan gällde om föreläggandet kunde omfatta även sådana nya fastighetsägare som förvärvat egendomen efter denna tidpunkt.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Regeringsrätten, 2004."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2004-55",
  "softwareVersion": "99d6714a37a82822",
  "citation": "avgorande-ra-2004-55, RÅ 2004 ref. 55, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2004-55 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:5beaf1ad1d81e7d7, 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-2004-55/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": "sha256:3c7277f50feecdc431ceed34ec1caa07af78242c485fcce39154c206142543bf",
  "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": "sha256:3c7277f50feecdc431ceed34ec1caa07af78242c485fcce39154c206142543bf",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T10:57:18.217Z",
    "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-2004-55",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}