{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-1996-61",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:d5ddf5812a7bd5c5a915ece2906560804fef097aae4d90d63fd842a1981e394f",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "RH 1996:61, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-rh-1996-61",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-1996-61",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "RH 1996:61, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad som hände: Ett antal anställda vid ett kommunalt daghem har i brev till förvaltningsledningen kritiserat sin närmaste chef.",
    "Vad domstolen sa: Uppgifterna i brevet har, med hänsyn till att de lämnats till högre chef, inte ansetts vara ägnade att utsätta den klandrade för andras missaktning och således inte utgjort förtal.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Avgörande från Svea hovrätt, 1996."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-1996-61",
  "softwareVersion": "3b2bcda5b6fa9a33",
  "citation": "avgorande-rh-1996-61, RH 1996:61, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-1996-61 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:bfd6d3ac6e31aaea, 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/rh-1996-61/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:d5ddf5812a7bd5c5a915ece2906560804fef097aae4d90d63fd842a1981e394f",
  "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:d5ddf5812a7bd5c5a915ece2906560804fef097aae4d90d63fd842a1981e394f",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T08:16:03.602Z",
    "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/rh-1996-61",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}