{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2008-86",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:055991ae578e34af3c6072e43d3879c9d27904e9479ec8be2dce0171b14c49d2",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "RÅ 2008 ref. 86, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-ra-2008-86",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2008-86",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "RÅ 2008 ref. 86, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad som hände: Vitesbelopp som en arbetsgivare betalat för en anställds räkning på grund av att den anställde genom sin anställning brutit mot en s.k. konkurrensklausul har hos arbetsgivaren setts som en avdragsgill allmän driftskostnad och inte som en personalkostnad.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Regeringsrätten, 2008. Tillämpar Inkomstskattelagen, Socialavgiftslagen."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2008-86",
  "softwareVersion": "ada1f987132383f9",
  "citation": "avgorande-ra-2008-86, RÅ 2008 ref. 86, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2008-86 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:aceb0665a7985171, 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-2008-86/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": "sha256:055991ae578e34af3c6072e43d3879c9d27904e9479ec8be2dce0171b14c49d2",
  "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": "sha256:055991ae578e34af3c6072e43d3879c9d27904e9479ec8be2dce0171b14c49d2",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T10:58:00.676Z",
    "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-2008-86",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}