{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2000-30",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:93551531719f73ca8ebe6983d686f52e11466f0f0cf4e9fc4b72ff96395c9a31",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "RH 2000:30, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-rh-2000-30",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2000-30",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "RH 2000:30, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad domstolen sa: Den omständigheten att bostadsbyggnad med tillhörande tomt avskiljts från en jordbruksfastighet har inte ansetts innebära en sådan disposition som hindrat en tillämpning av de s.k. lättnadsreglerna vid beskattning av gåva avseende återstoden av fastigheten.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Avgörande från Hovrätten för Västra Sverige, 2000."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2000-30",
  "softwareVersion": "16e40575b7b0dace",
  "citation": "avgorande-rh-2000-30, RH 2000:30, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2000-30 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:1e840a8fb9bb0ea4, 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-2000-30/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": "sha256:93551531719f73ca8ebe6983d686f52e11466f0f0cf4e9fc4b72ff96395c9a31",
  "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": "sha256:93551531719f73ca8ebe6983d686f52e11466f0f0cf4e9fc4b72ff96395c9a31",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T08:56:45.779Z",
    "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-2000-30",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}