Legal sources with official primary sources

Printed ·

SMLM Previewerrors, bugs and incomplete coverage may occurThe model is production-ready during Q4-26

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.

RH 2015:38

RH 2015:38, Svea hovrätt (2015)

Judgment of Svea hovrätt, 2015. Statutes applied: Aktiebolagslag. The headnote below is reproduced verbatim in Swedish, as published by the court.

Original headnote (Swedish)

En minoritetsaktieägare väckte talan i Stockholms tingsrätt mot en skiljedom angående fastställande av lösenbelopp i ett mål om inlösen av aktier enligt 22 kap. aktiebolagslagen (2005:551). Fråga uppkom om aktieägaren hade talerätt trots att han inte var införd i bolagets aktiebok. Hovrätten kom fram till att så var fallet.

Share this page

Core question

Fråga uppkom om aktieägaren hade talerätt trots att han inte var införd i bolagets aktiebok

The decision in three points

  1. What happened

    En minoritetsaktieägare väckte talan i Stockholms tingsrätt mot en skiljedom angående fastställande av lösenbelopp i ett mål om inlösen av aktier enligt 22 kap. aktiebolagslagen (2005:551).

  2. What the court said

    Hovrätten kom fram till att så var fallet.

  3. Why it matters

    Decision by Svea hovrätt, 2015. Applies ABL.

Risk profile of the decision

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

  • Applies one statute
  • 80 other decisions in the register apply the same statute

The decision in context

The decision is used in questions about company law and accounting.

Relations of the decision in the graph

Statutes (1)

  • ABLSFS 2005:551

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/rh-2015-38/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 compensation do I get for a delayed flight in the EU?How long can I return an online purchase in the EU?Can I ask a company to delete my personal data?What notice period applies under Swedish employment law?

    Source: NovaCopilot

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

    Court
    Svea hovrätt
    Decided
    2015-05-04
    Applies
    1

    Mål nr T 1497-14

    Also searched as: RH 2015 38, Rättsfall från hovrätterna 2015:38, Swedish judgment RH 2015:38, Case RH 2015:38, RH 2015:38 2015, T 1497-14, Case T 1497-14.

    • 4 kap. 37 §, 5 kap. 14 § och 15 § samt 22 kap. 6 §, 7 §, 8 §, 10 §, 11 § och 24 § aktiebolagslagen (2005:551)
    Hämta hela domen

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

    Svea hovrätt, 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

    • ABL

      SFS 2005:551 · Company law and accounting

    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
    2015-05-04Date of decision according to Svea hovrättSvea hovrätt
    2006-01-01Applied statute in force: SFS 2005:551Sveriges 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.

    RH 2015:38, En minoritetsaktieägare väckte talan i Stockholms tingsrätt mot en skiljedom angående fastställande av lösenbelopp i ett mål om inlösen av aktier enligt 22 kap. aktiebolagslagen (2005:551). Fråga uppkom om aktieägaren hade talerätt trots att han inte var införd i bolagets aktiebok. Hovrätten kom fram till att så var fallet.. NovaCopilot, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/rh-2015-38 (hämtad 2026-10-25, bevis sha256:dba2a136cf44e6eb, bygge legal-2026-10-25).

    Machine addressHow to cite the platform
    sha256:
    dba2a136cf44e6eb8712dab53ba71f543f6eecb566bef71acc4259895f991f05
    hämtad:
    2026-10-25
    source_confidence:
    official
    bygge:
    legal-2026-10-25
    officiell källa:
    https://rattspraxis.etjanst.domstol.se/sok/publicering/a11dca2f-deee-48b2-941a-edd18db1fed7

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

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