Rättskällor med officiella primärkällor

Utskrivet ·

Skip to main content
Skip to the answer

RÅ 2010 ref. 66

Datainspektionen har inte ansetts ha haft tillräckliga skäl för att meddela ett principiellt förbud mot att använda uppgifter om obetalda…

Datainspektionen har inte ansetts ha haft tillräckliga skäl för att meddela ett principiellt förbud mot att använda uppgifter om obetalda fakturor i kreditupplysningsverksamhet.

The decision in three points

  1. What the court said

    Datainspektionen har inte ansetts ha haft tillräckliga skäl för att meddela ett principiellt förbud mot att använda uppgifter om obetalda fakturor i kreditupplysningsverksamhet.

  2. Why it matters

    Published as a guiding decision by Supreme Administrative Court, before 2011, 2010. Applies Kreditupplysningslagen.

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 Supreme Administrative Court, before 2011
  • Applies one statute

The decision in context

The decision is used in questions about data protection.

Relations of the decision in the graph

Statutes (1)

Questions (0)

    Decisions (4)

    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/ra-2010-66/manifest.json

    Court
    Supreme Administrative Court, before 2011
    Decided
    2010-06-24
    Applies
    1

    Mål nr 7338-07

    • 4 § andra stycket och 5 § första stycket kreditupplysningslagen (1973:1173)
    Regeringsrätten, Sveriges Domstolar

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

    Statutes

    Case law

    Case law read on 2026-08-29.

    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 read2026-08-29
    IntervalEvery 30 days
    Next re-read2026-09-28
    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
    2026-08-29Row read against the courts' own registerSök rättspraxis, Sveriges Domstolar
    2010-06-24Date of decision according to RegeringsrättenRegeringsrätten
    1974-07-01Applied statute in force: SFS 1973:1173Sveriges riksdag

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

    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.

    RÅ 2010 ref. 66, Datainspektionen har inte ansetts ha haft tillräckliga skäl för att meddela ett principiellt förbud mot att använda uppgifter om obetalda fakturor i kreditupplysningsverksamhet.. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/ra-2010-66 (hämtad 2026-08-25, bevis sha256:38f8f6066f8a3093, bygge legal-2026-08-25).

    sha256:
    38f8f6066f8a30931c82ecec1e9d29e518e2569d9953f2bebecad22639445e13
    hämtad:
    2026-08-25
    source_confidence:
    official
    bygge:
    legal-2026-08-25

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

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