{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2016-44",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:7dcca564e6240b23529a16bc96ecd7c529a0a030fa9d8651eb0786d1f36ad6bf",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "RH 2016:44, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-rh-2016-44",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2016-44",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "RH 2016:44, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad som hände: Om ett överklagande i ett domstolsärende inte uppfyller de formella kraven enligt ärendelagen ska en domstol ge parten möjlighet att komplettera sitt överklagande när det utan närmare analys bedöms att det finns en viss möjlighet till framgång med överklagandet.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Avgörande från Hovrätten för Nedre Norrland, 2016."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2016-44",
  "softwareVersion": "e1992a3d5646f6f9",
  "citation": "avgorande-rh-2016-44, RH 2016:44, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2016-44 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:01a698fd3ab0d315, 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-2016-44/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": "sha256:7dcca564e6240b23529a16bc96ecd7c529a0a030fa9d8651eb0786d1f36ad6bf",
  "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": "sha256:7dcca564e6240b23529a16bc96ecd7c529a0a030fa9d8651eb0786d1f36ad6bf",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T06:01:54.803Z",
    "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-2016-44",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}