Arrenderättens förverkande - grunder för upphörande och skillnader beroende på hur arrendet klassificeras

Sammanfattning: Leaseholds that ceases due to forfeiture rarely happens. In order to successfully claim the cease of leasehold due to forfeiture, the violation needs to be significant. Swedish Land and Cadastral Legislation (Land Code) contains the grounds of forfeiture and it also states that the matter needs to be more than minor importance. The general clause, which means a violation not directly stated in the paragraph, assumes exceptional importance for the landowner. Besides these high demands, the leaseholder is also provided with a possibility to retain the access right. Another leaseholder advantage is that the landlord needs to act within a certain time span for the termination to be accurate and valid. Since forfeiture almost never occurs, the established practice is limited. This master thesis investigates the use of the grounds stated in the Land Code and how leaseholds usually cease. How much does a violation need to matter to reach a level where the leasehold possibly will cease? The investigation is based on established practice, from both court and regional tenancies tribunal. From twelve cases studied, my conclusion is that in three out of six claims, forfeiture has been approved. Differences in leasehold classification and its consequences has also been studied. To see how leasehold contracts generally are composed, two municipalities in each county in Sweden were asked to contribute with examples. Out of 41 inquiries, 19 responded with a total amount of 60 leasehold contracts. The problems that might occur when another form is chosen than the correct one is further discussed in this master thesis. All regulations are not of such character that forfeiture will be the result of violation. These are considered as regulations with limited effects on leasehold tenure and the meaning of these regulations are studied in this master thesis. Violations that are not directly followed by law takes place in the fifth item of the 23 § in chapter eight in the Land Code. This means that such violation needs to be of exceptional importance in order to successfully claim forfeiture. There is a lower level when claiming that leasehold contract not reasonably should be extended. Regulations of non-forfeiture character are therefore limited, and the landowner might have to wait until the end of the contract period to successfully be released from the leaseholder. To sum up, if contracts are to be ceased in advance there must be a sincere violation. Minor and exceptional importance has been part of the leasehold legislation for a long time and aims to prevent leaseholds to cease in advance due to trifles and minor mistakes. The demarcation is difficult and established practice is limited, which often leads to different results in different courts and the decisions that are made often contain dissenting opinions.