Högsta domstolens prejudikatbildande roll - Hur har den påverkats av EMR?

Sammanfattning: Precedent is one of the most important sources of law in the Swedish legal system. The Swedish Supreme Court is the highest instance in the Swedish legal system and it is also the court that can pronounce judgements that serve as guidance for the lower courts in the future. The precedents are not formally binding; they are however obeyed to a large extent. In November 2008 new regulations, regarding a requirement of leave to appeal in order for the Swedish Courts of Appeal to try a decision from the Swedish district courts, were introduced. One of the consequences of the new regulations was that the number of cases that were tried by the Court of Appeal would decrease. The regulation was not expected to affect the Swedish Supreme Court and the main purpose of this essay is to investigate whether this was the case or not. The main emphasis in the Swedish legal system is supposed to be in the first instance and this was also pointed out by the enforcement of the new regulations regarding leave to appeal when a case from the district court is appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Courts of Appeals main purpose is to verify that the decisions from the district courts are correct and correct the ones that might be incorrect. The Swedish Supreme Court is the highest instance of the general courts in Sweden. The main purpose of the Supreme Court is to review the decisions from the Courts of Appeal and to pronounce judgements that serve as guidance for the lower courts. The pronunciation of precedents is the most important task for the Supreme Court and therefore only cases that can make a contribution to the application of law is tried by the Supreme Court. In order to limit the number of cases in the Supreme Court rules regarding leave to appeal were introduced at an early point. In order for the Supreme Court to be able to fulfil its purposes, it is important that the procedure is efficient. It could, already in the 1980s, be established that the Supreme Court was not able to fulfil its purpose regarding precedents in an efficient manner. Throughout the years there have been many suggestions regarding ways to improve the procedure in the Supreme Court in order to improve the courts adjudication. The reform regarding leave to appeal that was conducted in November 2008 was not expected to influence the Supreme Court. Four years after the regulations were introduced it can however be stated that this was not the case. The Courts of Appeal have applied the rules too strict and the number of leaves to appeal that have been granted has been alarmingly low. The Supreme Court has criticized the reform and expressed worry over the declining number of appeals against the Courts of Appeals decisions. The evaluation of the reform has agreed with the criticism and concludes that the reform has affected the Supreme Court negatively. In order to improve the Supreme Courts adjunction the evaluation has given a number of suggestions that are now to be reviewed by the referral organizations. Hopefully this will result in new regulations for the Supreme Court.