Traditionsprincipen - utifrån ett samhällsekonomiskt och processekonomiskt perspektiv

Sammanfattning: Due to recent discussions concerning an eventual transition to the principle of a valid agreement and SOU 2015:18, this essay’s question formulation is if there are any advantages with the principle of tradition from a national economical and procedural economical perspective. To answer the question, I have used the legal dogmatic method. The principle of tradition means that a buyer gets protection from the seller’s creditors once the movable property has been transferred to him or her, or when the seller has been legally dispossessed of the movable property. The principle of a valid agreement would give the buyer protection from the seller’s creditors through the contract. After an examination of the current law, SOU 2015:18 and the pros and cons with the principle of tradition, my conclusion is that the principle of tradition is advantageous from a procedural economical perspective, while from a national economical perspective it would be more advantageous with the principle of a valid agreement. My conclusion is mainly supported by the following. From a national economical perspective, it has been put forth that Swedish trade have adapted to the principle of tradition, and the legal assessments for when creditor protection arises are relatively clear. Apart from these advantages, the public often lacks knowledge about the principle of tradition, the principle entails unnecessary transaction costs and is not adapted to international contexts. From a procedural economical perspective, the principle of tradition is advantageous as it streamlines the bailiff.