Legal sources with official primary sources

Printed ·

Skip to main content
Skip to the answer
NovaCopilotA service from ExploreWorldAI

NovaCopilot's registers are reviewed daily against official sources

AD 2005 nr 59

AD 2005 nr 59, Swedish Labour Court (2005)

Judgment of Swedish Labour Court, 2005. The headnote below is reproduced verbatim in Swedish, as published by the court.

Original headnote (Swedish)

Skiljeklausul gäller mellan parterna. Arbetstagaren, en personlig assistent, har avskedats från sin anställning och har i en förtryckt avskedandehandling erhållit en fullföljdshänvisning, som förutom att hänvisa till skiljeförfarande, även hänvisar arbetstagaren att under vissa angivna omständigheter väcka talan vid domstol. Fråga dels om skiljeklausulen i sig är oskälig, dels om arbetstagaren insett eller bort inse att hänvisningen om att väcka talan vid domstol inte avsåg henne.

Share this page

Core question

Fråga dels om skiljeklausulen i sig är oskälig, dels om arbetstagaren insett eller bort inse att hänvisningen om att väcka talan vid domstol inte avsåg henne

The decision in three points

  1. What happened

    Skiljeklausul gäller mellan parterna.

  2. Why it matters

    Published as a guiding decision by Swedish Labour Court, 2005.

Risk profile of the decision

MediumThe decision carries medium weight. Read it with the statute before relying on it alone.

  • Published as a guiding decision by Swedish Labour Court

Relations of the decision in the graph

Statutes (0)

    Questions (0)

      Agent commands

      • runCaseSummary()

        The core question and the decision in three points, verbatim from the published summary.

      • runLegalImpact()

        Risk profile, statutes and the decisions applying the same statute.

      • runObligationCheck()

        Deterministic test of whether the decision is guiding for your question.

      • runProofVerify()

        Check that the hash you cite belongs to this node.

      https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/node-agents/avgorande/ad-2005-59/manifest.json

      NovaCopilot reasons out a short answer from statutes and case law, with the source right below. 5 answers a day are free.

      NovaCopilot reasons: a short answer of at most 75 words, built only on our register, with the source right below.

      Common questions

      What notice period applies under Swedish employment law?Can an employer refuse annual leave?What requirements apply to data processors?

      Source: NovaCopilot

      NovaCopilot, start page with all registers: case law, legislation, compliance and health.

      The full basis, ready-made

      EU judgment pack (C cases), total 48.75 € (about 53 USD)

      Evidence chain and hash per row included. One-time purchase, delivered instantly.

      Open the pack
      Court
      Swedish Labour Court
      Decided
      2005-06-01
      Applies
      0

      Mål nr B 134-04

      Also searched as: AD 2005:59, AD 2005 59, Arbetsdomstolens domar 2005 nr 59, Swedish judgment AD 2005 nr 59, Case AD 2005 nr 59, AD 2005 nr 59 2005, B 134-04, Case B 134-04.

      Hämta hela domen

      Hämtas direkt från Sveriges Domstolar när du klickar. Vi lagrar inte domen.

      Arbetsdomstolen, Sveriges Domstolar

      Official publication. The address points to the authority or court that published the row.

      Checked against the publisher 2026-09-20

      Next check 2026-10-20 · Fresh

      See the open quality meter

      Statutes

        Case law read on 2026-09-05.

        Change monitoring

        The row is re-read against the publisher's own publication on a fixed interval. The dates below can be checked on the spot and travel with the API response.

        Change monitoring
        FieldValue
        RegisterSök rättspraxis, Sveriges Domstolar
        PublisherSveriges Domstolar
        Last read2026-09-05
        IntervalEvery 30 days
        Next re-read2026-10-05
        StatusChecked against the publisher
        Open the register at the publisher

        Row history

        Dated events concerning this exact row, newest first. No event appears here without a date in a primary source.

        Row history
        DateEventSource
        2026-09-05Row read against the courts' own registerSök rättspraxis, Sveriges Domstolar
        2005-06-01Date of decision according to ArbetsdomstolenArbetsdomstolen

        Monitoring states when the row was checked, not how the legal position should be assessed.

        What changed this week, every Monday

        A short letter with new judgments and rule changes in your areas, each with source and checksum. Free, unsubscribe any time.

        Topics

        Cite this row

        The string below travels with a memo, a case file or an agent chain. The same string sits in the citation field of the API response.

        AD 2005 nr 59, Skiljeklausul gäller mellan parterna. Arbetstagaren, en personlig assistent, har avskedats från sin anställning och har i en förtryckt avskedandehandling erhållit en fullföljdshänvisning, som förutom att hänvisa till skiljeförfarande, även hänvisar arbetstagaren att under vissa angivna omständigheter väcka talan vid domstol. Fråga dels om skiljeklausulen i sig är oskälig, dels om arbetstagaren insett eller bort inse att hänvisningen om att väcka talan vid domstol inte avsåg henne.. NovaCopilot, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ad-2005-59 (hämtad 2026-10-03, bevis sha256:4a4ee6f410727a7d, bygge legal-2026-10-03).

        Machine addressHow to cite the platform
        sha256:
        4a4ee6f410727a7d7fa053809ceaeb1219d216dd695c044436b4600f94aabd3a
        hämtad:
        2026-10-03
        source_confidence:
        official
        bygge:
        legal-2026-10-03
        officiell källa:
        https://rattspraxis.etjanst.domstol.se/sok/publicering/1616190f-66db-418b-add4-f9982e7f15b7

        Official publication. The address points to the authority or court that published the row. Arbetsdomstolen, Sveriges Domstolar.

        The row is a source reference with an official identifier. No legal advice and no compliance decision.