{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-1997-112",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:a15f45b07413077438f77b789d55b595f1c26469c8523edcd778620c6d1bdb5a",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "RH 1997:112, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-rh-1997-112",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-1997-112",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "RH 1997:112, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad som hände: För att få bifall till sitt yrkande om jämkning av ersättning för personskada enligt trafikskadelagen måste försäkringsgivaren, även när jämkningsgrunden är att den skadelidande ostridigt gjort sig skyldig till trafikonykterhetsbrott, visa att den skadelidande genom vårdslöshet har medverkat till skadan.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Avgörande från Svea hovrätt, 1996."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-1997-112",
  "softwareVersion": "f357f8bd724c3920",
  "citation": "avgorande-rh-1997-112, RH 1997:112, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-1997-112 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:f9b4d89a27c84941, 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-1997-112/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:a15f45b07413077438f77b789d55b595f1c26469c8523edcd778620c6d1bdb5a",
  "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:a15f45b07413077438f77b789d55b595f1c26469c8523edcd778620c6d1bdb5a",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T10:02:59.263Z",
    "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-1997-112",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}