Article 4.1(h) in the Rome I regulation establishes which law that will be applicable on contracts concerning financial instruments concluded in multilateral systems. The main problem is that most contracts concluded within these systems have standard clauses which contain a clause on the applicable law. If this is the case, Article 3.1 in the Rome I Regulation is applicable instead. This problem makes it difficult to find a need for article 4.1(h) if it will only be applicable in exceptional cases. However, the legal position on this matter is still unclear since the Rome I Regulation has just been put into force.

This paper considers the Swedish regulations of purchase taking the perspective of private persons as a starting point. The law of purchase from the year 1990 is applicable on a number of legal purchase situations where the contracting parties varies. Nevertheless, the law is mainly focused on the purchase between businessmen. This places private persons on level with businessmen, since they are given equal responsibility regarding legal knowledge and the drawing up of contracts. In order to get a deeper knowledge of the law of purchase and to reach an understanding of how it should be interpreted we have studied the government bill on the law, cases from the Supreme Court, doctine on the area and legal articles. The purpose with this paper is to examine whether the law of purchase from the year 1990 is too old to be applicable on private purchases today.

Article 4.1(h) in the Rome I regulation establishes which law that will be applicable on contracts concerning financial instruments concluded in multilateral systems. The main problem is that most contracts concluded within these systems have standard clauses which contain a clause on the applicable law. If this is the case, Article 3.1 in the Rome I Regulation is applicable instead. This problem makes it difficult to find a need for article 4.1(h) if it will only be applicable in exceptional cases. However, the legal position on this matter is still unclear since the Rome I Regulation has just been put into force.

When Swedish authorities are to purchase or rent something, public procurement is used as a means to an end. Authorities as well as suppliers are subjects to the fact that Swedish law regarding public procurement regulates the form of procurement in one set of particular regulations (LOU) and the form of contracts in another set of general regulations (AvtL). Suppliers and purchasing authorities close a contract regarding the subject of procurement and the law of public procurement regulates when such a contract can be closed, simultaneously the law of contracts regulates when parties are held to contracts and when contracts are to be rescinded. I investigate in this essay what these two types of regulations can result in for the contracting parties. As it is today agreements that have been entered into wrongfully still are valid, even if a court of law nullifies the procurement and sentences the purchasing authority to make a new public procurement.

When Swedish authorities are to purchase or rent something, public procurement is used as a means to an end. Authorities as well as suppliers are subjects to the fact that Swedish law regarding public procurement regulates the form of procurement in one set of particular regulations (LOU) and the form of contracts in another set of general regulations (AvtL). Suppliers and purchasing authorities close a contract regarding the subject of procurement and the law of public procurement regulates when such a contract can be closed, simultaneously the law of contracts regulates when parties are held to contracts and when contracts are to be rescinded. I investigate in this essay what these two types of regulations can result in for the contracting parties. As it is today agreements that have been entered into wrongfully still are valid, even if a court of law nullifies the procurement and sentences the purchasing authority to make a new public procurement.

The globalization and the realization of a European common insurance market have increased the importance of cross border insurance contracts. Despite that, a gathered set of rules regulating cross border insurance contracts does not exist. The sets of rules within Private International Law which arises today when determining the applicable law regarding cross border insurance contracts are the law of 1993 on applicable law to certain insurance contracts (the law of 1993) and the law of 1998 on applicable law to contractual obligations (Rome Convention). Since the Rome Convention is the only Community instrument which still is in the form of a treaty, work has been done in order to convert it into a regulation, called the Rome-I-regulation. Therefore, the future Rome I-regulation is of importance for the thesis as well since it most likely will replace the Rome Convention.Swedish law is based on the principle of party autonomy, which means that the contracting parties have the right to freely agree on the content of the contract, including the choice of law.

The purpose of this work is to find out how present manager contracts are set up in Landstinget Västmanland (the county council of Västmanland), explore managers? perception of these contracts and why managers have chosen leadership. The work has also reviewed the question if managers need to have a relationship or expertise to the activities they lead and which qualifications are needed in such case. The survey was conducted in two divisions in which nine interviews were held with managers at all levels. In addition to this a questionnaire including the 87 managers in the divisions were held.

When Swedish authorities are to purchase or rent something, public procurement is used as a means to an end. Authorities as well as suppliers are subjects to the fact that Swedish law regarding public procurement regulates the form of procurement in one set of particular regulations (LOU) and the form of contracts in another set of general regulations (AvtL). Suppliers and purchasing authorities close a contract regarding the subject of procurement and the law of public procurement regulates when such a contract can be closed, simultaneously the law of contracts regulates when parties are held to contracts and when contracts are to be rescinded. I investigate in this essay what these two types of regulations can result in for the contracting parties. As it is today agreements that have been entered into wrongfully still are valid, even if a court of law nullifies the procurement and sentences the purchasing authority to make a new public procurement.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

Abstract: Private equity used to be synonymous with tremendous yields and rates of return. However, the private equity market trembled in 2008, due to the financial meltdown caused by the worldwide credit crisis. Considering the current low number of exits within the private equity industry, the purpose of this thesis is to examine if there has been any change in how private equity firms control their portfolio companies since the inception of the crisis. One private equity company and two portfolio companies have been studied. The case study is prepared from interviews with senior directors in the portfolio company and investment managers in the private equity firm.

The economic analysis of building contracts is an unexplored field within Law and Economics. This paper makes an attempt to cast some light over the subject and encourage to more research within the field. The main purpose has been to describe why the actual price in a public construction project often turns out to be higher than the contract price and offer a way of handle that risk. In the paper a model is set up that shows an optimal contract given expectations on actual price and gaps in contracts. Cost increases for the buyer can mainly be explained by two situations.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.