Legal sources with official primary sources

Printed ·

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

Source status and reading dates are reported separately. A reading date is not source verification.

NJA 1983 s. 819

NJA 1983 s. 819, Supreme Court of Sweden (1983)

Judgment of Supreme Court of Sweden, 1983. Statutes applied: Föräldrabalk. The headnote below is reproduced verbatim in Swedish, as published by the court.

Original headnote (Swedish)

Ett av TR under rättegången meddelat interimistiskt beslut angående underhållsbidrag överklagades till HovR:n. I samband med sitt avgörande av den dit fullföljda frågan har HovR:n meddelat beslut om ersättning enligt rättshjälpslagen till biträde för där utfört arbete. Talan mot ersättningsbeslutet har ansetts kunna föras av biträdet utan hinder av de i 15 kap. 32 § 2 st. GB och 20 kap. 12 § FB stadgade fullföljdsförbuden.

Share this page

The decision in three points

  1. What happened

    Ett av TR under rättegången meddelat interimistiskt beslut angående underhållsbidrag överklagades till HovR:n.

  2. What the court said

    Talan mot ersättningsbeslutet har ansetts kunna föras av biträdet utan hinder av de i 15 kap. 32 § 2 st.

  3. Why it matters

    Published as a guiding decision by Supreme Court of Sweden, 1983. Applies Föräldrabalken.

Risk profile of the decision

HighThe decision carries substantial weight when relied upon. The reasons below show what the level rests on.

  • Published as a guiding decision by Supreme Court of Sweden
  • Applies one statute
  • 299 other decisions in the register apply the same statute

The decision in context

The decision is used in questions about family and migration.

Relations of the decision in the graph

Statutes (1)

Questions (0)

    Decisions (8)

    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/nja-1983-s-819/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 requirements apply to data processors?When must a personal data breach be reported?What does the AI Act require for AI features in our service?What notice period applies under Swedish employment law?

    Source: NovaCopilot

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

    Court
    Supreme Court of Sweden
    Decided
    1983-12-16
    Applies
    1

    Mål nr Ö 1225-81

    Also searched as: NJA 1983 s 819, NJA 1983:819, NJA 1983 819, Nytt juridiskt arkiv 1983 s 819, Swedish judgment NJA 1983 s 819, Case NJA 1983 s. 819, NJA 1983 s. 819 1983, Ö 1225-81.

    • 20 kap. 12 § föräldrabalken (1949:381)
    Hämta hela domen

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

    Högsta domstolen, Sveriges Domstolar

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

    Re-read scheduled

    Checked against the publisher 2026-09-20 · Next check 2026-10-20

    See the open quality meter

    Statutes

    Case law

    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
    StatusRe-read scheduled
    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
    1983-12-16Date of decision according to Högsta domstolenHögsta domstolen
    1950-01-01Applied statute in force: SFS 1949:381Sveriges riksdag

    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.

    NJA 1983 s. 819, Ett av TR under rättegången meddelat interimistiskt beslut angående underhållsbidrag överklagades till HovR:n. I samband med sitt avgörande av den dit fullföljda frågan har HovR:n meddelat beslut om ersättning enligt rättshjälpslagen till biträde för där utfört arbete. Talan mot ersättningsbeslutet har ansetts kunna föras av biträdet utan hinder av de i 15 kap. 32 § 2 st. GB och 20 kap. 12 § FB stadgade fullföljdsförbuden.. NovaCopilot, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/nja-1983-s-819 (hämtad 2026-11-02, bevis sha256:20d25d1a9543cdde, bygge legal-2026-11-02).

    Machine addressHow to cite the platform
    sha256:
    20d25d1a9543cdde1b60425371739530f849d889d2c11b3c1b02f32a9e54ee91
    hämtad:
    2026-11-02
    source_confidence:
    official
    bygge:
    legal-2026-11-02
    officiell källa:
    https://rattspraxis.etjanst.domstol.se/sok/publicering/91435390-2b92-463e-9122-d976f6e4b3b9

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

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