Summaries 2000
21. December 2000
Criminal law. Drugs. Sentencing. Dolus eventualis.
31-year-old man with previous convictions was sentenced to 11 years unconditional imprisonment for having transported 9.853 kg. amphetamine and 47.5 kg. hashish from the Netherlands to Norway, see section 162, subsections 1 and 3 of the Penal Code. The lower courts had found that there was intent in the form of dolus eventualis. The Supreme Court stated that the accused had acted with intent. - At the time of the importation, the amphetamine had been damp and had therefore weighed more than it would have done had it been dry. It had to be assumed that the weight of amphetamine that was to be sold on was the same weight as had been imported. - Statements form the court concerning the importance to be attached to the accused's co-operation with the police, also in the event that the accused first began to co-operate when the case was pending appeal to the Supreme Court. Case history: Kristiansand District Court no. 99-00948 M - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1999-01467 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00340, criminal appeal.
21. December 2000
Criminal law. Indecency. Sentencing. Preventive detention.
37-year-old man with previous convictions was sentenced to five years' unconditional imprisonment for breach of sections 195, 207, 211 and 213 of the Penal Code (indecent assault of a minor under 14 years of age, incest, pornography and sexual intercourse with a minor) as these provisions were applicable prior to a statutory amendment of 11. August 2000 no. 76. Authority was also given to commit him to preventive detention for a period of up to 5 years pursuant to section 39 no. 1 litræ a-f of the Penal Code. He had, inter alia, sexually abused his daughter in a particularly serious manner from the time when she was 8 years old until she was 13. He was also found guilty of indecent assault of three other girls under the age of 14. The authority to commit to preventive detention was taken into account in sentencing. Case history: Sarpsborg District Court No. 99-00506 M - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-2000-00331 M/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-01224, criminal appeal.
Decision 21. December 2000
Sentencing. Determination of a sentence to be combined with the term remaining to be served for two previous convictions. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00902, criminal appeal.
Decision 21. December 2000
The Penal Code section 162 (drug felony), the Prisons Act section 41, cf. the Penal Code section 54 no. 3 (commission of a criminal act whilst on parole from prison). Sentencing. Determination of a sentence for a drug felony committed whilst on parole from prison, to be combined with the term still remaining following parole. Case history: Bergen City Court no. 1999-974 M/01 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-01886 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00911, criminal appeal.
Decision 21. December 2000
The Penal Code section 233 (murder). Case concerning sentencing for murder and whether to grant a power to commit the convict to preventive detention. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 99-03432 M/43 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-02275 M/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00841, criminal appeal.
Decision 21. December 2000
The Penal Code section 216 (child abduction), international child abduction. Application of law. Since 25. November 1994 until the present day, the convict had without permission withheld his son, born in 1987, and his daughter, born in 1991, from their mother's custody. The children had been captured and withheld in Morocco when the mother left the country in 1994 and returned to Oslo. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 98-10294 M/22 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-02592 M/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00922, criminal appeal.
Decision 21. December 2000
The Working Environment Act section 73 B (transfer of undertakings - salary and working conditions). Case concerning an employee's right to maintain his or her employment contract with the former employer after the undertaking has been transferred to a new employer. Case history: Oslo City Court - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-02315 A/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00053B, no. 335/1999.
Decision 21. December 2000
The Working Environment Act section 73 E and 73 B (employees rights upon the transfer of an undertaking). The case concerned whether 83 employees whose employment contracts were transferred to a new employer upon the transfer of an undertaking from a local authority to a limited company, were bound by the transfer, or whether they still maintained an employment relationship with the local authority, or, alternatively, whether the local authority could be held liable as employer alongside the limited company. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 97-09951 A/86 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-02025 A/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00054B, no. 363/1999.
Decision 20. December 2000
The Alcohol Act section 10-1, cf. the Penal Code section 28. Case concerning sentencing and the confiscation of the illegal proceeds of the production and sale of moonshine. Case history: Skien and Porsgrunn City Court - Agder Court of Appeal LA-2000-00482 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-01178, criminal appeal.
Decision 20. December 2000
The Penal Code section 233 (murder). Case concerning sentencing for murder. Case history: Stavanger City Court No. 98-00848 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-00368 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00494, criminal appeal.
Decision 20. December 2000
The Limited Companies Act of 1976 sections 12-4, 12-6 and 12-8 (payment of dividends). Case concerning a claim for remuneration for financial advice given to a limited company which resulted in the company's shares being sold to a new owner. The sole issue before the Supreme Court was whether the claim fell within the scope of the rules relating to the payment of dividends in the Limited Companies Act of 1976 sections 12-4 ff. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 97-10244 A/78 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-03135 A/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00141, civil appeal.
Decision 18. December 2000
The Town and Country Planning Act, the Cultural Monuments Act Case concerning the criminal liability of enterprises and the confiscation of the proceeds of crime for the unlawful demolition of a listed building. Case history: Rana District Court no. 98-393 M - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1999-00334 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00358, criminal appeal.
Decision 18. December 2000
Penal Code section 257, cf. section 258 (aggravated theft) and section 260 (taking and driving). Case concerning sentencing against two polish citizens for three counts of aggravated theft from a watchmaker's shop where the proceeds of crime amounted to approximately 1.9 million Norwegian kroner, and taking and driving a motor vehicle without the consent of the owner in connection with the thefts. Case history: Trondheim City Court no. 99-01971 M - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-2000-00246 M and LF-2000-00247 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00896, criminal appeal.
Decision 12. December 2000
Expropriation Compensation Act section 9. Case concerning the deduction to be made in compensation payable upon expropriation for benefits derived from the expropriation, when the E18 motorway in Kristiansand was directed through a tunnel along the same route, see the Expropriation Compensation Act section 9. Compensation for agricultural land that following planning regulation was regulated for the building of a road. Case history: Kristiansand City Court - Agder Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00052B, no. 359/1999.
Decision 8. December 2000
The Compensation Act section2-1. Case concerning a claim for damages for personal injury arising from an accident on a prepared alpine ski slope. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 97-04370 A/02 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-02597 A/02 and LB-1998-02598 A/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00051B, no.332/1999
Decision 5. December 2000
National Insurance Act of 1966 section 16-3, subsection 1. Case concerning whether employer's tax contribution pursuant to section 16-3 subsection 1 of the National Insurance Act of 1966 was payable on remuneration paid to consultants. The payment was remuneration for labour or a commission that was not performed in the course of self-employment. Case history: Bergen City Court no. 97-01434 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1998-01514 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00116, civil appeal.
Decision 4. December 2000
Penal Code sections 228 (assault), 233 (murder) and 237 (negligently causing incapacity to work). Case concerning sentencing for attempted murder and two other counts of assault. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 98-11491 M/80 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-01753 M/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00532, criminal appeal.
Decision 29. November 2000
The Salt Water Fishing Act sections 42 and 43. Fishing Agreement Case concerning whether the compensation provisions contained in sections 42 and 43 of the Salt Water Fishing Act must yield for divergent rules contained in article 16 of the first supplement to the Fishery Agreement between Norway and the United Kingdom of 17. November 1960. Section 3 of the Salt Water Fishing Act provides that the Act applies subject to such limitations as are recognised in international law or which derive from any agreement made with a foreign state. Case history: Senja District Court No. 97-544 - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1998-00716 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00044A no. 277/1999.
Decision 29. November 2000
Penal Code section 195 (act of indecency with a child under 14 years of age) and section 207 (incest). Case concerning sentencing for indecent assault of a step-daughter, which took place from the victim was 5 years old until she was ten. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00050B, case no. 1/2000.
Decision 29. November 2000
Penal Code sections 228, 229 and 232. Sentencing for aggravated assault with intent/occasioning bodily harm with intent. Case history: Stavanger City Court no. 99-00308 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-01055 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00759, criminal case, appeal.
Decision 29. November 2000
Judicial competence. The Courts of Justice Act sections 106 and 108. Case concerning whether each and all of the judges of the Gulating Court of Appeal were incompetent to sit in a criminal case where a prosecutor who was appointed as judge on the Gulating bench, appeared as prosecuting counsel in a case before the court. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal LG-2000-01361 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-01208, criminal case.
Decision 28. November 2000
The Taxation Act of 1911. Case concerning cutting through in taxation law, and the consequences of a taxpayer transferring his personal accountancy business to a newly-established company with shared liability (DA) that is entirely owned and controlled by himself. Case history: Nedre Telemark District Court No. 98-00185 - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1999-00849 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00315, civil appeal.
Decision 22. November 2000
Penal Code section 267 cf. section 268 (aggravated robbery). Sentencing for aggravated robbery. Case history: Jæren District Court no. 1999-00156 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-01473 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00567, criminal case, appeal.
Decision 22. November 2000
Penal Code section 255 (embezzlement). Application of law. Case history: Larvik District Court no. 99-00509 - Agder Court of Appeal LA-2000-00064 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00685, criminal case, appeal.
Decision 22. November 2000
Penal Code section 270 cf. section 271 (gross fraud). Case concerning sentencing for attempted and accomplished gross fraud and for receiving the proceeds of crime. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 98-06531 M/78 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-2000-00376 M/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00779, criminal case, appeal.
Decision 22. November 2000
The Courts of Justice Act section108 (judicial competence). Case concerning the competence of the presiding judge to sit at the retrial of a criminal case which had been set-aside and which was to be heard with a jury, see the Courts of Justice Act section 108. Case history: Frostating Court of Appeal LF-2000-00169 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-01002, criminal case, appeal.
Decision 21. November 2000
Act relating to Motor Traffic in Outlying Areas section 4, subsection 1, litra c (statutory authority for traffic for particular purposes). The accused was found guilty of illegally driving a snow-scooter in an outlying area. Case history: Vest-Telemark District Court No. 99-00139 M - Agder Court of Appeal LA-2000-00131 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00376, criminal case, appeal.
Decision 17. November 2000
Penal Code section 162 (drug felony). Sentencing. Aiding and abetting the import of hashish. Case history: Fredrikstad City Court no. 98-01121 M - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-02666 M/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00667, criminal case, appeal.
Decision 16. November 2000
The Finnanger Case. The Motor Vehicles Liability Act section 7 (contributory negligence). EEA-law. Case concerning a claim for damages pursuant to the Motor Vehicles Liability Act, and settlement under an accident insurance from a passenger who was permanently injured when the car in which she was a passenger, and which was driven by a person who was under the influence of alcohol, left the road. A primary issue in the case was whether section 7, subsection 3 litra b of the Motor Vehicles Liability Act accords with three EEA motor insurance directives and, furthermore, to what extent a Norwegian legal provision can be interpreted narrowly in order to avoid conflict with EEA-law in the situation where the legislature has wrongly assumed that the legal provision harmonises with the EEA-provision. Finally, the case concerned reduction of the insurance sum payable on the grounds of gross negligence on the part of the assured, see the Insurance Agreements Act section 13-9. Case history: Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1998-00997 A and LF-1998-00998 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00049B, no. 55/1999.
Decision 10. November 2000
The Limited Companies Act section 5-25 Case concerning the requisition by a former shareholder of an enquiry into a limited company pursuant to sections 5-25 ff. of the Limited Companies Act of 13. June 1997 No. 44. Case history: Oslo Probate Court No. 99-00664 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-02038 K/04- Supreme Court HR-2000-00043A, interlocutory appeals case journal no. 414/1999.
Decision 10. November 2000
The Working Environment Act section 60 no. 1 (protection against unfair dismissal) and the Contract Act section 36 (sensor of unfair contract terms). Case concerning the validity of the dismissal of a bank employee who was dismissed because he did not comply with a condition concerning place of residence in his employment contract. Case history: Frostating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00218, civil appeal.
Decision 8. November 2000
Penal Code section 239 (manslaughter) and the Road Traffic Act section3 (duty of care).The judgement of the Court of Appeal was set aside and a retrial ordered on the grounds that the law had been wrongly applied. Case history: Alta District Court no. 99-34 M - Hålogaland Court of Appeal Lh-1999-00665 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00294, criminal appeal.
Decision 8. November 2000
Penal Code section 239 (manslaughter) and the Road Traffic Act section3 (duty of care). The judgement of the Court of Appeal was set aside and a retrial ordered on the grounds that the law had been wrongly applied. Case history: Skien and Porsgrunn City Court no. 99-01279 M - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1999-01716 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00362, criminal appeal.
Decision 7. November 2000
Case concerning the right to common land in property belonging to AS Værdalsbruket situated in Commonage (law relating to common land). Færen Nordre, Juldal and Væren. Case history: Stjør- and Værdal District Court No. 97-838 A - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1998-01142 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00048B, no. 321/1999.
Decision 6. November 2000
The Compensation Act section 3-7 (regress for national insurance benefits etc. received), the Motor Vehicle Liability Act section 4 (objective right to compensation from the insurer for injury caused by a motor vehicle). The matter in dispute was whether an employer who had paid full salary to an employee during the employee's sick-leave following a road traffic accident, was entitled to reimbursement of the employers' tax contribution from the liable insurance company. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 97-5075 A/71 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-00819 A/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00214, civil appeal.
Decision 6. November 2000
Penal Code section 29 no. 1 (loss of public office). The main issue in the case was whether a police officer who was convicted, inter alia, for assault and threatening behaviour towards his common-law wife, should be removed from public office pursuant to section 29 no. 1 of the Penal Code. Case history: Sunnmøre District Court - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-2000-00061 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00490, criminal appeal.
Decision 3. November 2000
Penal Code section 195 (acts of indecency with a child under 14 years of age) and section 207 (incest). Case concerning the convict's appeal on a point of law on the issue of sentencing and against the actual sentence following convictions for breach of the Penal Code section 195, subsection 1 and 2 (acts of indecency with a child under 14 years of age) and section 207 (incest). The criminal acts took place prior to the Amendment Act of 11. August 2000 No. 76. Case history: Oslo City Court no. 99-06541 M/60 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-2000-00089 M/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00537. Criminal appeal.
Decision 2. November 2000
The Taxation Act of 1911, section 42 (definition of income).. Case concerning whether benefits attached to an employee's acquisition and subsequent sale of shares in the employer's company are taxable as "a benefit attained through work" in the terms of the taxation legislation. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 97-06042 A/18 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-00441 A/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00047B, no. 373/1999.
Decision 2. November 2000
The Penal Code sections 257 and 258 (theft and aggravated theft). Sentencing. Case history: Sunnmøre Court of Examination and Summary Jurisdiction no. 99-00835 M - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1999-01127 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00449. Criminal appeal
Decision 1. November 2000
The Taxation Act of 1911, section 53 (tax allowance for accrued deficit in the determination of income). Case concerning the validity of a decision by the tax assessment board to amend a tax assessment and to restore a deferred deficit resulting from participation in a dissolved partnership company, see the Taxation Act of 1911 section 53, sub-section 1, 4th sentence. Case history: Søre Sunnmøre District Court no. 98-00169 - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1999-00307 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00027. Civil appeal.
Decision 1. November 2000
The Penal Code section 162 (drug felony). Sentencing and confiscation of the proceeds of crime. Narcotics. Case history: Jæren District Court nr. 00-00348 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-02214M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00643. Criminal appeal.
Decision 27. October 2000
Compensation. Insurance law. Occupational injury insurance. Contributory negligence. Contributory causes. A barmaid who for many years had worked in a smoke-filled night-club, was awarded occupational injury compensation pursuant to section 11 of the Occupational Injury Insurance Act for injury suffered as a result of passive smoking. She was herself a smoker, and smoked between 10 and 15 cigarettes per day. However, this did not justify a reduction in the compensation award, see the Occupational Injury Insurance Act section 14. Dissent 4-1. The case before the Supreme Court related solely to the question of whether the compensation should be reduced. Case history: Stavanger City Court No. 97-0007 A - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1998-00133 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00041A, no. 152/1999.
Decision 27. October 2000
Allodial law. Conditions concerning allodial land. Question whether to deny redemption of allodial land. The property in question fulfilled the necessary requirements to be vested with allodial rights, cf. the Allodial Rights Act section 23, cf. sections 1 and 2. The property covered an area of 239 decares (about 60 acres), of which 14 decares were crop land , 9 decares were home grazing land and 216 decares were outlying fields. The property was situated in an agricultural area with scattered housing. Redemption of allodial land was not clearly unreasonable in the terms of the Allodial Rights Act section 21, subsection 2. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00042A, no. 360/1999.
Decision 25. October 2000
Criminal Law. Robbery. Application of law. Sentencing A 40 year-old man with previous convictions was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for robbery (Penal Code section 267, sub-section 1, cf. section 268, subsection 1) and several other offences, including breach of the Penal Code section 227, subsection 1, first sentencing alternative (threat to commit a criminal act). He had in a brutal and threatening manner offended an 83 year-old female shop assistant who was alone in the shop that he had picked out. The degree of violence involved was greater than in ordinary bag-snatching cases. Despite the fact that the principle in the Penal Code section 64 (sentencing in the case of recidivism) was applicable (there was a previous conviction for robbery), the Supreme Court found that there were not grounds for adjusting the sentence that had been handed down by the lower courts. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-000239. Criminal case, appeal.
Decision 24. October 2000
Labour Law. Employer's management prerogative. Two trained ship mechanics were employed by the Stavanger Local Authority to serve as mechanics for the local authority's fireboat. They were graded and placed on the salary scale for fire captains. They had both previously for some time been employed as fire constables in the local authority. The issue in the case was whether the local authority by virtue of its management prerogative could decide that the fireboat crew should be integrated into the local authority's main fire service. The Supreme Court found that the decision was justified. The Court made comments concerning the scope of the management prerogative. The right to organise, manage, control and distribute work must take place within the scope of the working relationship that has been established. Case history: Stavanger City Court No. 97-01367 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1998-01573 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00046B, no. 346/1999.
Decision 20. October 2000
Civil Procedure Act section 356. Case concerning the scope of the requirement in the Civil Procedure Act section 356 that requires that leave to appeal to the court of appeal generally may only be given where the appellant's economic interest in the appeal exceeds NOK 20 000. Case history: Indre Sogn District Court no. 99-00134 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-2000-00126 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00487 (civil interlocutory appeal).
Decision 11. October 2000
Penal Code section 239, Road Traffic Act section 31. Sentencing for negligently causing the death of another person by the use of a motor vehicle. Case history: Karmsund District Court no. 99-00217 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-02067 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00561 (criminal appeal).
Decision 5. October 2000
Watercourses Act. Case concerning a claim for compensation by Kemi.gruppen (The Kemi Group) against Alta Kraftlag AL (Alta Power) for loss of grazing land for reindeer following the regulation of the Oldervik waterway in Seiland in 1993. Case history: Alta District Court no. 97-318 A - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1998-00801 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00040A no. 331/1999.
Decision 26. September 2000
Case concerning the legality of police methods used during the investigation of a serious drug felony. Case history: Asker and Bærum District Court no. 09-49 M - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-00781 M/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00206 (criminal appeal).
Decision 26. September 2000
Marriage Act section 46. Case concerning the validity of a nuptial agreement - whether the spouses upon entering into the agreement had agreed that it would not be effective inter partes, and, furthermore, whether the provisions of the Marriage Act section 46, subsection 2 and Contracts Act section 36 concerning the modification of agreements were applicable. Case history: Holmestrand Court of Probate no. 98-00341 A - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1999-00626 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00272 (civil appeal).
Decision 22. September 2000
Taxation Act (1911) section 44 and the Limited Companies Act (1997) section 3-9. Case concerning a claim from the parent company for income tax deduction pursuant to section 44, subsection 1 litra d for loss accrued when the company assumed responsibility for it's subsidiary's debts. Case history: Trondheim City Court no. 98-00401 A - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1999-00834 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00039A, no. 310/1999.
Decision 21. September 2000
Children Act section 36. Case concerning a claim for custody following the death of the child's mother, cf. The Children Act sections 36 and 37. Case history: Heggen and Frøland District Court no. 98-00183 A - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-02635 A/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00045B, no. 329/1999.
Decision 20. September 2000
Penal Code sections 227, 228 and 229. Sentencing. Violence and threats, in particular towards the accused's two former cohabitees. Case history: Stavanger City Court no. 99-01102 M - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-0202223 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-006223 (criminal appeal).
Decision 15. September 2000
Penal Code section 48a. Case concerning the application of the provisions of the Penal Code section 48a on corporate criminal liability in relation to a one-man heavy transport company, for breach of the regulations concerning driving- and resting time. Case history: Sunnmøre District Court no.99-00008 - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1999-00808 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00079 (criminal appeal).
Decision 15. September 2000
Act relating to motor traffic in outlying areas and watercourses, section 12 and 3. The question in the case was whether passengers on snow-scooters can also be prosecuted pursuant to the prohibition against snow-scooters. The Supreme Court held that an incidental, gratuitous, passive and occasional transport without implications for the driving of the snow-scooter (as was the case here) fell outside the scope of criminal liability imposed by the Act. The unlawful snow-scooter driving would have taken place even if the accused had not allowed himself and his equipment to be transported. Case history: Senja District Court no. 99-232M - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1999-00682 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00080 and HR-2000-00081 (criminal appeals).
Decision 6. September 2000
Penal Code § 162. Case concerning sentencing for dealing in approx. 20 grams of heroin for personal use. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-00977 M/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00254 (criminal appeal).
Decision 1. September 2000
Penal Code sections 54 and 28c. Case concerning the replacement of a suspended sentence conditional upon participation in a government program for the rehabilitation of drink-driving offenders, with an unconditional term of imprisonment because the offender had arrived at one of the sessions of the programme under the influence of alcohol. Case history: Haugesund Court of Examination and Preliminary Jurisdiction no. 99-00408 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-01823 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00156 (criminal appeal).
Decision 31. August 2000
The Mortgage Act section 3-8. Case concerning whether an unregistered vendor's fixed charge in a motor vehicle has priority before an already established charge pursuant to the Mortgages Act section 3-8, subsection 1 litra a. Case history: Eiker, Modum and Sigdal District Court no. 98-526 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-00124 A/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00044B, no. 330/1999.
Decision 30. August 2000
Occupational Injury Insurance Act sections 21 and 15. Case concerning the date for ascertaining injury caused by exposure to solvents pursuant to the Occupational Injury Insurance Act of 16. June 1989 no. 65 section 21, and whether a claim pursuant to the Act was statute-barred pursuant to the rules of limitation in section 15 of the Act. Case history: Oslo City Court no. 98 00322 A/75 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-00743 a/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00038A, no. 379/1999.
Decision 30. August 2000
Penal Code section 267, cf. section 268, subsection 2. Case on appeal concerning sentencing for aggravated robbery. Case history: Stavanger City Court no. 99-00401 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-01533 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00678 (criminal appeal).
Decision 22. August 2000
The Plenary Act section 5. Question whether the State can participate, without being a party to the proceedings, in a case concerning the liability of an insurance company pursuant to the Motor Vehicles Liability Act section 7, sub-section 3, litra b. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00041B, no. 55/1999.
Decision 18. August 2000
In 1983, Oddrun Røher sold a plot of his property "Sundet" in Eidsvoll local authority to Eidsiva Brannkasse. The property from which the plot was separated was bound along the westerly boundary by the river Vorma. Eidsvoll local authority activated its right of pre-purchase and entered into the purchaser's rights and duties pursuant to the contract. The issue in the case was whether the local authority's acquisition included the shoreline and the riverbed beyond the actual plot. Case history: Eidsvoll District Court no. 98-330 - Eidsivating Court of Appeal LE-1999-00474 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00040B, no. 382/1999.
Decision 17. August 2000
Case concerning the Plenary Act section 5 and the Courts of Justice Act section 108, regarding the capability of three Supreme Court justices to hear a case. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00039B, no. 55/1999.
Decision 4. July 2000
Mental Health Act 1961 (repealed) section 5. Case concerning an application by a patient for discharge from forced mental health care. Case history: Indre Sogn District Court - Supreme Court HR-2000-00037B, no. 338/1999.
Decision 4. July 2000
Penal Code section 162. Case concerning the implication in criminal law of the fact that the police in a drug case had used untraditional investigation methods, deemed by the police to amount to provocation in the securing of evidence. Case history: Trondheim City Court no. 99-01618M and 99-01619M - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1999-00331 M and LF-1999-00334 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00038B, journal no. 69/1999.
Decision 30. June 2000
Family law. Child law. Right of custody and child welfare care order. A mother was awarded custody of her 8-year-old daughter pursuant to the Children Act section 35 a, subsection 1, cf. section 34, subsection 3. The child was placed with foster parents, and a care order was made pursuant to the Children Act. The Court based its decision on the assumption that both natural parents - perhaps within different frames of time - would make an attempt to regain custody, see the Child Welfare Act section 4-21. The case was determined on the basis of what would be in the best interests of the child in the event of custody again being awarded to one of the natural parents. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00037A, no. 268/1999.
Decision 29. June 2000
Inheritance law. Family law. Compensation rights in connection with cohabitation A surviving cohabitee was granted a right to compensation from the deceased cohabitee's estate for exceptionally extensive nursing and care of the deceased cohabitee over a long period of time. The Supreme Court found that a right to compensation for nursing and care of a non-marital partner upon separation or death could be founded on general principles of enrichment and restitution. There was no cohabitation agreement or will. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-03544 A/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00036A, no. 296/1999.
Decision 28. June 2000
Property law. Concession. Public administration law. Right of pre-emption. The Ministry of Agriculture's decision concerning the exercise of a right of pre-emption, see the Land Concession Act section 2, was deemed invalid. The Ministry had intended to exercise the right of pre-emption in order to use the property in a land-exchange deal in connection with the laying of a new route for the E-18 motorway. The Court found that the exercise of the right of pre-emption for this purpose was within the scope of the Land Concession Act, but that the administrative decision had not been sufficiently qualified. Case history: Sand District Court no. 97-00137 - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1998-00247 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00035 A, no. 171/1999.
Decision 28. June 2000
Contract law. Building law. Claim for damages from by-passed tenderer. A firm that had submitted the next-to-lowest tender purported that it had been by-passed. It was submitted that the lowest tender should have been ignored, as it was erroneous in several respects. In this case, there were no grounds for awarding damages for non-performance of the contract. Loss from reliance on the promise had been awarded by the district court. The opposing party had not appealed against this part of the decision. The Court addressed, amongst other things, the question whether the anti-contractor-provisions in the rules for tender were satisfied. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00035B, no. 247/1999.
Decision 28. June 2000
Penal Code sections 270 and 271 (fraud and gross fraud). Case concerning the Court of Appeal's application of the law as to whether the indictment that was the subject of appeal should have been dismissed. Furthermore, the case concerned whether the Court of Appeal, when dealing with the issue of dismissal and the claim for damages, was lawfully composed, since only the professional judges, and not the lay judges, had taken part in the decision. Case history: Oslo City Court no. 98-3977 M/78 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-02689 M/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00036B, case no. 7/2000.
Decision 27. June 2000
Mortgage law. Housing law. Mortgage in a housing co-operative unit and housing-co-operative bond. A mortgage in the document of title to a housing-co-operative dwelling receives security against creditors pursuant to the rules relating to pledges in the Mortgage Act section 4-3, subsection 3 and section 3-2, when, additionally, notice is given to the lessor. The provision in section 1-4 concerning the fixed or highest amount of the mortgage claim as a condition for such security does not apply. Notice to the lessor as to the total amount of the mortgage debt does not imply that the mortgagee does not have security for claims in excess of the amount stated. Case history: Nedre Romerike Court of Execution and Enforcement no. 98-00368 C - Eidsivating Court of Appeal LE-1999-00424 K - Supreme Court HR-2000-00033 A, journal no. 406/1999.
Decision 27. June 2000
Insurance law. Excess. Delay interest. In addition to the excess, the insured under a third-party insurance had to pay a proportionate part of the delay interest that related to the excess. The Insurance Agreement Act of 1930 section 92, subsection 2 contained a similar rule for procedural/prosess interest. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00034B, no. 308/1999.
Decision 26. June 2000
Criminal law. Driving under the influence of alcohol. Application of law. A 55-year-old man with no previous convictions was sentenced to 15 days conditional imprisonment and an unconditional fine of NOK 10 000 for breach of the Road Traffic Act section 22, subsection 1 (driving a motor-vehicle whilst under the influence of alcohol). He had an alcohol concentration on his breath of 0.253 mg/litre air, which in the terms of the Act is greater than 0.25 mg. Allowance was made for two circumstances that might have affected the result of the reading. The appellant argued in vain that section 22 of the Road Traffic Act must be interpreted narrowly, so that in order to secure a conviction in cases where the breathalyser test cannot rule out that the alcohol concentration in the blood is less than 0,005 %, a blood test must be taken. Case history: Nordmøre District Court no. 98997 - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1999-00222 - Supreme Court HR - 2000-00031B, case no. 44/1999.
Decision 23. June 2000
Criminal law. Driving a boat under the influence of alcohol. Sentencing. A 51-year-old man with no previous convictions was sentenced to 14 days imprisonment for breach of section 33, cf. section 37 of the Act of 26. June 1998 no. 47 relating to pleasure- and small boats. He had driven a 14-foot boat with a 40-hp outboard motor whilst he had an alcohol concentration in his blood of 0.0025. The Court stated that the potential danger normally posed by driving a boat with a blood-alcohol concentration in excess of 0.002 is so serious that it calls for an unconditional term of imprisonment. Case history: Nordfjord Court of Examination and Summary Jurisdiction no. 99-00213 F - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1999-01714 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00032B, case no. 5/2000.
Decision 23. June 2000
Land law. Concession. Expropriation law. Compensation and interest for loss of user upon the exercise of a right of pre-emption. At an appraisement hearing pursuant to the Land Concession Act of 31. May 1974 no. 19 section 14, second paragraph, cf. section 1 no. 4 and section 2 second paragraph, the State appealed to no avail against the valuation and the order to pay interest for loss of user. As far as part of the property - a forest area - was concerned, the Court of Appeal had correctly made an ordinary calculation of the user-value, based on a capitalising interest of 5 %, which is used when calculating user-value in connection with expropriation and preservation of forests, and had also tried the capitalising interest against the interest terms for loans in the State Agricultural Bank. Furthermore, it was correct to order interest for loss of user to be paid at the rate of 5 % of the price of the whole property, calculated from the date of sale. - The Land Concession Act section 1 no. 4 could not be construed as meaning that the user-value pursuant to section 14, second sentence of the Act should be applied in accordance with a circular issued by the Ministry of Agriculture on concession price, which indicated that the appropriate figure at the time of sale was 7 %. Dissent 3-2. Case history: Flekkefjord District Court no. 98-00040B - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1998-01219 B - Supreme Court HR-2000-00028B no. 257/1999.
Decision 23. June 2000
Matrimony Act (1927) section 11. The issue in the case was whether a premium fund accumulated by one of the spouses for the payment of future premiums for a private pension insurance, was exempt from division of matrimonial property pursuant to the Matrimony Act of 1927 section 11, second paragraph, first sentence. If the answer to the first question was no, the next issue was whether the other spouse was entitled to compensation pursuant to section 19, second sentence of the Act. A separate issue was whether the acquirement by one of the spouses of private pension rights, which are exempt from division of matrimonial property, entitled the other spouse to compensation pursuant to section 19 of the Act. Case history: Bergen Probate Court No. 93-01267 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1998-01634 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00029B, no. 334/1999.
Decision 23. June 2000
Tax law. Criminal law. Human rights. Imposition of surtax. Surtax for 1987 was discharged, and surtax for 1988 was fixed at 30 %, see the Tax Assessment Act section 10-2 no. 1, cf. section 10-4 no. 1. The Court found in favour of a taxpayer that Article 6 no. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides that a criminal charge shall be dealt with within a reasonable time, applied also to the Inland Revenue's determination of whether to impose increased surtax for intentional or grossly negligent tax evasion. The handling time for the two assessments was 11 years and 8 years respectively. The Supreme Court also discussed, but did not conclude, whether there had been a breach of the prohibition in Article 4 no. 1 of the Seventh Additional Protocol to the Convention against punishing a person twice for the same criminal act (double jeopardy). The increased surtax had been imposed in 1987, after the taxpayer had been convicted previously that year of tax evasion with intent. Case history: Asker and Bærum District Court No. 97-361 A - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-01138 A/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00030b, no. 142/1999.
Decision 23. June 2000
Damages. Social security law. Occupational injury insurance coverage for injury suffered whilst travelling from home to the place where a job assignment was to be carried out. The National Insurance Act of 28. February 1997 No. 19 section 13-6, second paragraph concerning occupational injury benefit, could not be construed to cover injury suffered by the victim when driving his employer's service van from his own home to a job assignment that had been agreed upon the previous day. Compare the decision in Rt. 2000 p. 220. Case history: Social Security Tribunal TRR-1998-00089 - Eidsivating Court of Appeal LE-1998-00864 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00060.
Decision 20. June 2000
An application for the reversal of a decision in a criminal case was rejected. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00298 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00587
Decision 20. June 2000
A 22-year-old man with no previous convictions was sentenced to 16 years imprisonment for murder with intent. The court found that he had intended to shoot a bouncer, but that he had misfired and hit another person who died. Statements concerning the treatment of aberratio ictus (misfiring) in criminal law. Three justices were of the opinion that the accused could be convicted of murder with intent. Two justices meant that the act ought to be treated as two separate offences, attempted murder with intent, and consummated manslaughter. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 99-02529 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-01598 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00332.
Decision 14. June 2000
An agricultural property that was subject to succession by primogeniture was transferred for the sum of NOK 1 050 000, being the value of the property pursuant to an allodial valuation. Two years later, a section of the land comprising plots for holiday cottages with index-regulated leaseholds was sold for NOK 2 million. The rental income of these plots was NOK 77 000 per annum. The co-heirs applied for an adjustment of the arrangement (appraisement) made when the property was transferred, cf. the Allodial Rights Act section 57. However, the application was refused because the district court (and later the Court of Appeal) found that the sale had not resulted in an "appreciable gain". This was a condition that, by its nature, was subject to the exercise of discretion, and the appropriate remedy was to request a re-appraisement, rather than to appeal the decision of the district court, see the Appraisement Act section 26. The Allodial Rights Act section 57 cf. section 56 was applicable in the present case, notwithstanding the regulatory status and nature of the sold plots. The re-appraisement was quashed. The natural point of departure when calculating "appreciable gain" was the price applicable when the property had been transferred subject to an allodial valuation, and from which the co-heirs had benefited. Dissent 3:2. Case history: Hallingdal District Court No. 97-00102 D - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-02868 B/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00032A, no. 349/1999.
Decision 8. June 2000
Case concerning sentencing for speeding. The defendant had driven at 142 km/hour in an area with a speed limit of 90 km/hour. Case history: Drammen City Court No. 1486/98 M - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-000765 M/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00273.
Decision 8. June 2000
Case concerning a call from shareholders for the dissolution of a limited company based on general principle of law, alternatively on the Companies Act of 1976 section 13-3. Case history: Sand District Court no. 97-00066 - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1998-000684 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00027B, no. 278/1999.
Decision 7. June 2000
Case concerning sentencing for import of 287.51 grams of heroin. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-03034 M/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00056.
Decision 31. May 2000
Case concerning sentencing for storing 1433 grams of heroin. Case history: Kristiansand City Court no. 99-00520 - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1999-01018 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00030A, case no. 4/2000.
Decision 25. May 2000
A was convicted in the court of appeal for rape, robbery and false imprisonment of a female shop assistant in a shop in Oslo. He robbed the shop till using force and threats. Thereafter he pushed the woman into a lavatory where he raped her and then left her locked in the lavatory. The conviction also covered a number of minor matters. At the date of the crime, A was just over 15 years and 8 months old. The Supreme Court found that, in the light of Supreme Court practice in similar cases, the sentence of 3 years and 4 months' imprisonment awarded by the court of appeal could not be said to be disproportionate. In the circumstances, where A had been referred to a child welfare institution following his release from custody pending trial, and in light of his young age at the time of the crime, a majority of three of the Justices found that the conditional term of the sentence could be fixed at 2 years and 4 months. The unconditional term, i.e. the term to be served in custody, was thus fixed at 1 year. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 99-1628 M/77 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-02282 M/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00029a, case no. 6/2000.
Decision 18. May 2000
Case concerning sentencing for driving under the influence of alcohol. Case history: Tinn and Heddal District Court no. 99-00098 M - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1999-01215 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00025B, case no. 9/2000.
Decision 16. May 2000
Case concerning the power to assess tax on the basis of an estimation, and review of the taxation authority's estimate in calculating the value of goodwill upon the transfer of a personal undertaking to a limited company. Case history: Nord-Troms District Court no. 97-1533 A - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1998-00788 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00027A, no. 319/1999.
Decision 16. May 2000
Case concerning whether the Tax Assessment Act section 4-10 no. 1 and no. 2 provides the necessary authority to oblige a psychologist in private practice to produce his appointment books for 1994 and 1995 without contravening his duty of confidentiality pursuant to the Psychologists Act section 6. Case history: Sør-Gudbrandsdal District Court no. 98-00025 - Eidsivating Court of Appeal LE-1998-00644 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00028A, no. 313/1999.
Decision 16. May 2000
The Court increased the sentence for rape of an unconscious woman to 120 days' imprisonment. Case history: Oslo City Court 98-07473 m/51 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-01619 M/01 and LB-1999-03049 m/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00118, criminal case, appeal.
Decision 11. May 2000
The Court found that profit on shares acquired by employees in the employer company was not a "benefit acquired through work" in the terms of the Taxation Act 1911 section 42(1), see the Taxation Act 1999 section 5-1. Where employees acquire shares at a discount there will be a "benefit acquired through work", but the question as to whether an employee is liable to pay tax on any increased value of the shares must be determined in accordance with the ordinary rules relating to the taxation of share profits. The discount on the shares had not been realised and could therefore not be subject to taxation. Dissent 3:2. Case history: Stavanger City Court No. 96-01025 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1997-01547 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00024B, no. 199/1999.
Decision 27. April 2000
Bank found liable for damages on the grounds of negligence in the giving of financial advice. On the bank's recommendation, a customer had invested money in unsecured high interest deposits in an investment company that entered into a moratorium with its' creditors that resulted in only a 25 % dividend. The claim for damages was deemed to arise out of the contractual relationship between the bank and its' customer, and was not statute barred, see the Limitation Act sections 3 and 9. Case history: Hedmarken District Court no. 96-01028 A - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-00072 A/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00026A, no. 64/1999.
Decision 26. April 2000
The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the local council concerning the imposition of property tax on a housing estate - "Kvastebyen" - within the Skjeberg property tax zone in Sarpsborg local authority, see the Property Tax Act of 6. June 1975 No. 29 section 3. Viewed in isolation, Kvastebyen did not satisfy the statutory requirement of urban development, but the property tax zone as a whole fulfilled the statutory requirements for imposing property tax. The question whether the Kvastebyen estate was included in the property tax zone was the kind of demarcation issue that the courts should be wary of trying. Case history: Sarpsborg City Court No. 96-00202 A - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-01488 A/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00023B, no. 181/1999.
Decision 25. April 2000
Case concerning the scope of an out-of-court settlement between a deceased's estate in bankruptcy of the one part and one of the heirs and his spouse of the other part, relating to chattels in the possession of the latter, but to which the estate in bankruptcy claimed possession. The issue was whether the settlement, once the estate in bankruptcy had been wound up, precluded the other heir to the deceased's estate from seeking to establish that the same chattels belonged to the deceased's estate. The Court found that although the debtor of a bankrupt estate as a general rule must respect a settlement agreed by the estate, this did not apply in the present case where the plaintiff had not had the opportunity of influencing the settlement agreed upon. The Court found also that the exception to the scope of the Lugano Convention in Article 1(2)(1) of the Convention (whereby inter alia rights in property arising out of wills and succession are exempted from the scope of the Convention) did not apply to all disputes concerning a deceased's estate, but is limited to disputes of a purely inheritance law nature. The proper venue for a dispute concerning title to real property was Norway, cf. Lugano Convention Article 16(1)(a). Consequently, the other related claims could be cumulated with the present action, cf. Convention Article 6(4). Appeal against a court order heard by a chamber of the Supreme Court (as opposed to the Appeals Selection Committee of the Supreme Court) pursuant to the Supreme Court Act of 1926 section 6(2). Case history: Asker and Bærum District Court No. 98-02320 A - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-00881 K/04- Supreme Court-2000-00021B, interlocutory order journal no. 344/1999.
Decision 14. April 2000
The Court found against a female teacher who sought damages for occupational disability that she claimed was caused by poisoning and poor indoor climate at the school where she taught. There was no causation between her illness and exposure to 1,4 dichlorbenzidin (DCB) in her classroom. DCB was used in the urinals in the boys' lavatories, and odour and air from the lavatories had seeped into the classroom through an incorrectly installed extraction channel. The plaintiff had developed Multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS). Case history: Oslo City Court No. 03177/95 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1996-01375 A and LB-1996-01376 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00020B, no. 342/1997.
Decision 14. April 2000
Østfold Energi AS (Østfold Power Company) was liable in damages to Fredrikstad Energiverk AS (Fredrikstad Power Station) for breach of contract when it had ceased to deliver electricity that it was contractually bound to deliver. The rules relating to damages in the Sale of Goods Act could be applied by way of analogy to breaches of the kind concerned in this case, even though they were not directly covered by the Act. A claim for damages for a tax disadvantage was, for the time being, not entertained by the Court as it was unclear whether a certain portion of the damages was subject to taxation whatsoever. Continuing proceedings, see Rt. 1998 page 1863. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00024A, no. 131/1997.
Decision 14. April 2000
An 82-year-old medical practitioner with no previous convictions was given a conditional discharge for breach of the Penal Code section 233 first and second paragraphs, cf. 235 second paragraph (premeditated homicide committed out of compassion). Upon the initiative and with the consent of a seriously and terminally ill patient, he had ended the patient's life. The Supreme Court found that on an interpretation of the Penal Code section 235 second paragraph it could not accept defence counsel's argument that section 233 must be interpreted narrowly, i.e. with the reservation that the killing must be unlawful. Nor could it accept the argument that the act was not punishable on the grounds of necessity (which is an absolute defence), cf. section 47. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 97-03983 M/01 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-00273 M/01 and LB-1998-03115 M/01. Supreme Court HR-2000-00025A, case no. 47/1999.
Decision 13. April 2000
The Court found against the proprietor of a plot of land who claimed to have acquired by prescription an area that fell outside the boundary limits, but within the garden fence that had been erected. The condition for prescription in the Prescription Act section 2 that the person claiming prescription must have occupied the land as his own was satisfied. The proprietor and her legal predecessor (her vendor) had been in good faith when she had purchased the property, see the Prescription Act section 4. However, the vendor had in 1949 agreed to a the partition of an adjoining plot, and thus he was or ought to have been aware of the true position of the boundaries. Case history: Akershus and Oslo Land Conciliation Court no 28/1995 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-01014 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00018B, no. 255/1999.
Decision 13. April 2000
A severance agreement entered into upon resignation secured a bank manager salary and other benefits for a period of two years, plus special pension rights. Later, in connection with the closure of the bank, the bank claimed in vain that it was not bound by it's pension obligations under the severance agreement, see the Contract Act section 36. The pension settlement agreed upon was usual for bank managers. The fact that the bank's problems may have been associated with the conduct of the bank manager did not entitle the bank to free itself from its' obligations. Case history: Oslo City Court 96-04776 A/31 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-00750 A/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00019B, no. 304/1999.
Decision 3. April 2000
Deportation order containing an absolute prohibition against re-entering the country (see the Aliens Act section 30) was upheld against a foreigner who had been resident in Norway for many years and who had several children residing in the country. Dissent 3:2. The grounds for the deportation was a conviction for inter alia indecent assault on the deportee's daughter and two step-children from his cohabitee's previous marriage, for which he had been sentenced to two year's imprisonment. The majority of the Court found that deportation was not disproportionate, notwithstanding that the family would be separated and would suffer hardship. Four of the Justices found that the Court had full power to review the assessment of whether or not the deportation was disproportionate, whilst one of the Justices was of the opinion that the Court should exercise restraint in this respect. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00023A, no. 267/1999.
Decision 28. March 2000
Frøystul power station in the County of Telemark, has since the 1920s been owned and run by Norsk Hydro Production AS (hereafter referred to as Hydro). The power station is situated in Tinn local authority, whilst the main reservoir for the power station is situated in Vinje local authority. In 1984, 50 percent of the power station reverted back to the state. In 1993, Hydro was granted concession to purchase the reverted share back from the state. The concession provided for the payment of a tax duty to Vinje and Tinn local authorities. The issue in the case before the Court was from which point in time the duty began to run. Case history: Oslo City Court no. 96-04214 A/81 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1997-03448 A/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00017B, no. 156/1999.
Decision 27. March 2000
Appeal against a court order concerning the interpretation of the Taxpayers Act section 48 no. 5, third sentence. More precisely, the case concerned whether a taxpayer has the right to have his case transferred to the Court of Execution as a civil action in order to have the validity of his tax assessment tried, notwithstanding that the tax authorities have asserted that the measure to which the complaint relates should be set aside. Case history: Sandnes Court of Execution - Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00021A, Appeals Selection Committee journal no. 337/1999.
Decision 27. March 2000
Case concerning the measure of damage for personal injury etc. following a car accident. Case history: Oslo City Court - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1997-02321 A/03 and LB-1997-02322 A/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00022A, no. 336/1998.
Decision 24. March 2000
Sentencing for counterfeiting money. Case history: Oslo City Court no. 99-00676 M/75 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-01574 M/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00016B, no. 10/2000.
Decision 17. March 2000
Case concerning whether there was causation between a road traffic accident in which the plaintiff had been run over, and the plaintiff's permanent health problems. In the event that there was causation, the Court considered whether the causal link was sufficiently close to give rise to liability in tort for the insurance company. Case history: Oslo City Court no. 94-08625 A/45 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1997-00529 A/01 and LB-1997-00530 A/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00015, no. 276/1998.
Decision 9. March 2000
Case concerning the Penal Code section 195 (indecent assault of a child under the age of 14 years). Case history: Vardø District Court no. 99-257 M - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1999-00457 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00020A, case no. 8/2000.
Decision 9. March 2000
Case concerning sentencing for aggravated robbery. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00013B, no. 79/1999.
Decision 9. March 2000
Case concerning sentencing for aggravated robbery. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00013B, no. 79/1999.
Decision 9. March 2000
Case concerning the validity of an administrative decision of the Value Added Tax Complaints Board pursuant to the Value Added Tax Act section 55, first paragraph no. 2, relating to the calculation in arrears of output VAT and the imposition of an additional charge. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00014B, no. 182/1999.
Decision 8. March
Case concerning whether upon correcting a judgement delivered by the Conciliation Board, a new time limit for lodging an appeal begins to run from the date of service of the corrected judgement. The time limit having not been observed, the Court considered whether an application to appeal out of time had been lodged within the one-month time limit prescribed in the Courts Act section 154, first paragraph. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00018A, Appeals Selection Committee journal no. 347/1999. See also earlier cases: Hadeland and Land District Court no. 98-00226 A - Eidsivating Court of Appeal LE-1998-00585 K - Supreme Court HR-1999-00086K.
Decision 8. March 2000
Case concerning whether X County Authority, as owner of a hospital, was strictly liable in tort for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff who, whilst forcibly admitted as a patient at X County Hospital, broke a window in his hospital room and threw himself out of it. Case history: Nedenes Local District Court no. 96-00019 A - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1998-00082 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00019A, no. 59/1999.
Decision 3. March 2000
Case concerning the regulation of rent pursuant to the Ground Lease Act of 1975 section 14, second paragraph. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00016A, no. 269/1999.
Decision 3. March 2000
Case concerning sentencing for the acquisition and sale of amphetamine. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00017A, case no. 2/2000.
Decision 25. February 2000
Case concerning an application for a declaration of nullity and damages for economic and non-economic loss for defamatory statements made in the Bergens Tidende newspaper. The primary issue was whether or not a press report of an administrative decision can be the subject of a declaration of nullity. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00012B, case no. 61/1998.
Decision 23. February 2000
Case concerning an action by Activ Forsikring AS (an insurance company) for recourse against the state after the company had paid damages following a road traffic accident on the E-16 motorway in which a motorcyclist was killed. The issue was whether persons for whom The Norwegian Public Roads Administration were vicariously liable, had acted negligently when laying a new road surface in the wheel tracks, or in putting out deficient warning signs, and, if so, whether this was the cause of the accident. Case history: Oslo City Court No. 97-01953 A/37 - Eidsivating Court of Appeal LE-1998-00356 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00010B, no. 93/1999.
Decision 23. February 2000
Case concerning the validity of a decision of the Value Added Tax Complaints Board concerning the calculation in arrears of value added tax and additional charge where reduction had wrongfully been made for the ingoing duty, see the Value Added Tax Act section 16 no. 5 Case history: Oslo City Court - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-00674 A/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00011B, no. 207/1999.
Decision 22. February 2000
Case concerning an appeal against a court order issued by the Borgarting Court of Appeal, whereby Aftenposten AS (a newspaper) was fined for contempt of court pursuant to the Penal Code sections 48 a and 48 b (provisions governing the criminal liability of enterprises). Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00009B, case no. 60/1999.
Decision 22. February 2000
Case concerning the interpretation of a court judgement that concluded that a tax assessment should be set aside, and whether the application to amend the assessment was "raised" in time, see the Tax Assessment Act of 13. June 1980 section 9-6, no. 5 litra c. Case history: South Gudbrandsdal District Court no. 97-00274 - Eidsivating Court of Appeal LE-1998-00149 A - Supreme Court HR- 2000-00014A, no. 218/1999.
Decision 22. February 2000
Case concerning whether there were grounds for liability in tort in a case brought against the East Agder County Authority. The issue in the case was whether the county authority as a result of deficient safety, was strictly liable for personal injury suffered by the plaintiff who, whilst forcibly admitted as a patient at a county hospital, broke a window in his hospital room and threw himself out of it. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00015A, no. 59/1999.
Decision 14. February 2000
Case concerning the liability of a bank as employer for damage suffered as a result of a fraud to which one of the bank's employees was an accomplice. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00012A, no. 213/1999.
Decision 14. February 2000
Case concerning the interpretation and application of the National Insurance Act of 17. June 1966 no. 12 section 11-1, no. 1 litra a, second paragraph, see the new National Insurance Act of 1997 section 13-6, second and fourth paragraphs. The issue was whether industrial injury coverage applies to travel during working hours from home to the first place of work. Case history: Social Security Tribunal no. 97-01694 - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1998-00805 A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00013A, no. 204/1999.
Decision 10. February 2000
Case concerning a claim for a price reduction and compensation pursuant to the Sale of Property Act of 3. July 1992 no. 93 sections 4-12 and 4-14. Case history: Kristiansand City Court no. 97-02098 - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1998-01251A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00011A, no. 248/1999.
Decision 8. February 2000
Sentencing. The accused had exposed two women to the risk of contracting HIV, and one of them had contracted the virus. Case history: Orkdal District Court no. 99-2 - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1999-00355 M - Supreme Court HR-2000-00010A, case no. 62/1999.
Decision 4. February 2000
Sentencing.Case history: Eidsivating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00009A, case no. 3/2000.
Decision 1. February 2000
Case concerning the power of the courts when making a custody order pursuant to the Parents and Children Act section 35, third paragraph, cf. section 34, third paragraph, to order joint custody subject to a condition that the father cannot oppose the removal of the child to Germany. Case history: Oslo City Court no. 97-10900 A/14 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-03092 A/03 and LB-1998-03093 A/03 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00008A, no. 236/1999.
Decision 24. January 2000
Appeal on a point of procedure against a decision of the Court of Appeal concerning the fixing of the quantum of damages for breach of contract. The issue was whether the Court of Appeal had acted beyond its powers when it awarded higher damages than the award made by the district court in a case where there had been no cross-appeal lodged. Case history: Trondenes District Court no. 96-386 - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1998-00542 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00007A, no. 222/1999.
Decision 24. January 2000
Case concerning the interpretation and application of the Occupational Injuries Insurance Act section 21, more particularly whether an illness was ascertained before the Act entered into force on 1. January 1990. Case history: Sandefjord City Court no. 98-00114A - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1998-01420A - Supreme Court HR-2000-00008B, no. 256/1999.
Decision 21. January 2000
Case concerning whether or not an advertisement for clothes carrying an emblem that is a company trademark for beer and mineral water, falls within the scope of the prohibition against advertising for alcohol in the Alcohol Act section 9-2, first paragraph. Case history: Oslo City Court - Supreme Court HR-2000-00006A, no. 193/1999.
Decision 18. January 2000
Case concerning sentencing for aggravated bank and post office robbery. Case history: Sarpsborg City Court/Heggen and Frøland District Court No. 98-00247 M/98-00116 M - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-03064, LB-1998-03065 M/02 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00004A, case no. 71/1999.
Decision 18. January 2000
A Supreme Court Justice was not disqualified from hearing a case concerning the criminal liability of a corporate enterprise, see the Courts Act section 108 and the Penal Code section 48a. In 1992, he had written an article about the criminal liability of corporate enterprises in the press, and in his capacity as Director General of Public Prosecutions he had given instructions implementing the rules. In principle, a judge is not disqualified on account of views he has expressed in a legal work. His interest was not of such a nature that it disqualified him. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00005B, case no. 60/1999. Case concerning the conditions for imposing preventing supervision. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00005A, case no. 65/1999.
Decision 18. January 2000
A 32-year-old male with previous convictions was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of four years and six months for breach of the Penal Code section 193 (indecency with a person who is incapable of resisting the act), section 162 (drug felony) and the Drug Act section 24. He had, inter alia, had sexual intercourse with women after having served them intoxicating substances or sedatives so that they became unconscious or fell into a deep sleep. In sentencing for breach of the Penal Code section 193, first paragraph, second sentencing alternative, the court drew a parallel with sentencing practice for rape (Penal Code section 192). - The Penal Code section 229, first sentencing alternative (reducing a person to helplessness, unconsciousness or any similar state) could not be applied concurrently with the Penal Code section 193, first paragraph, second sentencing alternative, the latter being deemed to consume the former. The Court also ordered the confiscation of indecent photographs portraying women other than those of whom he was convicted of assaulting, see the Penal Code section 37b. Dissent 3-2 regarding the issue of confiscation. Case history: Agder Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR 2000-00006B, case no. 72/1999.
Decision 7. January 2000
Case concerning sentencing where an attorney had embezzled client account funds. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00002A, case no. 63/1999.
Decision 7. January 2000
A 24-year-old male with previous convictions was sentenced to one year and nine months imprisonment for breach of the Penal Code section 229, first paragraph, second sentencing alternative, cf. section 232 (aggravated assault occasioning bodily harm resulting in disability or permanent injury), cf. section 230 (increase in sentence due to a previous conviction for violent crime). The sentence included 102 days carried over from a former conviction for assault occasioning actual bodily harm. In the present case, he had slashed the victim's face with a decorator's knife. There had been no real provocation. Dissent 3-2. Case history: Supreme Court HR-2000-00003A, case no. 70/1999.
Decision 7. January 2000
A patient won his application to be discharged from forced psychiatric after-care, see the Mental Health Act section 13, first paragraph, cf. section 6, cf. section 5. The primary requirement of a serious mental illness was deemed to be satisfied, but not the criteria concerning treatment - in this particular case whether the mental health of the patient was very likely to deteriorate in the relatively near future. Case history: Tønsberg City Court - Supreme Court HR-2000-00003B, no 343/1999.
Decision 7. January 2000
A 30-year-old male was sentenced in the lower court to five months imprisonment, of which 60 days were unconditional, for a number of offences including fraud, see the Penal Code section 270. He claimed in vain that the president of the district court had been disqualified from hearing the case pursuant to the Courts Act section 106 no. 7. The basis for his claim was that the daughter of the chief local judge and the son of one of the police officers who had taken part in the search of his premises in connection with the investigation of the count of fraud, were married. The Supreme Court found that the police officer was not one of the groups of persons covered by the Courts Act section 106 no. 7. Nor were the chief local judge and the police officer related within the definition of the provision. Furthermore, the president of the court was not disqualified pursuant to the Courts Act section 108. Case history: Agder Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00004B, case no. 67/1999.
Decision 7. January 2000
A 31-year-old man with no previous convictions was sentenced to 90 days imprisonment for breach of the Penal Code section 229, first sentencing alternative (assault occasioning bodily harm). He had inflicted several blows to the victim's face with his fist, as a result of which the victim's cheekbone and the partitioning wall of his nose were broken. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00001A, case no. 68/1999.
Decision 6. January 2000
A 31-year-old man with no previous convictions was sentenced to 90 days imprisonment for breach of the Penal Code section 229, first sentencing alternative (assault occasioning bodily harm). He had inflicted several blows to the victim's face with his fist, as a result of which the victim's cheekbone and the partitioning wall of his nose were broken. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-2000-00001A, case no. 68/1999.
Decision 6. January 2000
Five men had in varying degrees taken part in two or more of a total of five instances of importing narcotics. They were convicted for breach of the Penal Code section 162, first and second paragraph, cf. fifth paragraph (aggravated drug felony concerning a large quantity, and complicity) and sentenced to imprisonment for varying periods between four years and two months, and fourteen months. Dissent 3-2 as regards a co-accused who had acted as courier on two of the trips and who was sentenced to fourteen months imprisonment. In sentencing, the Court equated ecstasy and cocaine with amphetamine: 8 ecstasy tablets were deemed under certain conditions to be equal to one gram of amphetamine, and cocaine was deemed to be equivalent to amphetamine. Case history: Stavanger City Court - Gulating Court of Appeal cf. inter alia LG-1998-01742 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00001B, case no. 59/1999.
Decision 6. January 2000
A 36-year-old male with no previous convictions was sentenced to seven years imprisonment for breach of the Penal Code section 162, second paragraph, cf. first paragraph, fifth sentence (aggravated drug felony and complicity in a drug felony), and section 317, first paragraph (receiving the proceeds of a criminal act). The Court also ordered confiscation of NOK 1 500 000 being the proceeds of crime, see the Penal Code section 34, cf. section 37d, first paragraph. He had imported 50 000 Temgesic tablets, 49 000 of which he had resold. The Court stated that the sentence for illegal dealing with Temgesic should be stricter than the sentence for dealing with cocaine and amphetamine, but not as strict as for dealing with heroin. This view moderated former Supreme Court practice narcotics cases concerning Temgesic. Case history: Eiker, Modum and Sigdal District Court No. 98-00741 M - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998-03563 M/01 - Supreme Court HR-2000-00002B, case no. 51/1999.
Decision 22. December 1999
The majority in the Court of Appeal (the lay judges) had acquitted a lorry driver of breach of the Penal Code section 239 (negligently causing the death of another person) and the Road Traffic Act section 3 (general duty to drive with care). On a downhill winding stretch of road, which was marked with "dangerous bends" signs, the trailer skidded and the driver of a motor car coming in the opposite direction was killed. With dissenting votes (4-1) the Supreme Court quashed the judgement of the Court of Appeal on the grounds that the reasons for the judgement were not adequately stated. The issue was raised as to whether the accused ought to have allowed a wider safety margin when he reduced speed before embarking on the decent. Case history: Frostating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-1999-00071B, case no. 56/1999.
Decision 22. December 1999
A tax-payer who has not complied with the duty in the Tax Assessment Act section 4-1 no. 1, second sentence, to inform the income tax authorities of errors in his tax-assessment of which he is fully aware, is deemed to have given "incorrect or incomplete details" pursuant to section 9-6 no. 3 litra a of the Act. Case history: Oslo Court of Execution and Enforcement No. 98-01740 D - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1999-00635 K/04 - Supreme Court HR-1999-00091A, court order journal no. 239/1999.
Decision 21. December 1999
A 45-year-old woman who was 100 % medically and occupationally disabled following a road traffic accident in 1993, was awarded compensation for permanent injury, special damages and loss of future earnings. The case before the Supreme Court was limited to a claim for damages for incurred and future losses, which were calculated to be NOK 3 200 000. The claim for compensation for the cost of treatment abroad was dismissed. The case considers claims for compensation under the system of user-directed personal assistants. Private insurance payouts amounting to some NOK 1.5 million were not deducted, see the Damages Act section 3-1. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-1999-00070B, no. 334/1998.
Decision 21. December 1999
In accordance with a collective pension insurance agreement, an insurance company gave a premium discount based on a tariff from 1963 founded on 4 % of the stock capital in the company, see the Insurance Companies Act of 29. July 1911 no. 1 section 73, second paragraph no. 2, cf. section 74 and section 75. Following an increase in interest rates, the discount was increased. When new rules were introduced in the Insurance Business Act of 10. June 1988 no. 39 section 8-1, the customer companies claimed in vain that they were entitled to a share of the profit calculated on the basis of the full premium exclusive of discount. The Supreme Court gave weight to the principle of insurance law that provides that pay-out shall be proportionate with payments in. Case history: Trondheim City Court no. 96-00412/97-00298 A - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1997-01013 A - Supreme Court HR-1999-000901, no. 70/1999.
Decision 20. December 1999
The police and prosecuting authority can require details of a subscriber's name, address, telephone number or data communication address, cf. the provisions concerning the duty of secrecy in the Telecommunications Act of 23. June 1995 no. 39 section 9-3, third paragraph. The provision must be construed narrowly, and qualifications attached to the information that the police have to provide in order to gain access to the details required. A majority of the Court held that a so-called dynamic host address/IP-address/IP-number - i.e. a new number that is allotted to the subscriber each time a connection is made - with precise details of the time of the connection which pointed unambiguously to the subscriber, sufficed for the name of the subscribing customer to be disclosed. Dissent 4-1. Appeal against a court order heard by a chamber of the Supreme Court (as opposed to the Appeals Selection Committee of the Supreme Court) pursuant to the Supreme Court Act of 1926 section 6. Case history: Lofoton Court of Examination and Summary Jurisdiction - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1998-00892 - Supreme Court HR-1999-00088A, case no. 29/1999.
Decision 20. December 1999
A 29-year-old male with no previous convictions was sentenced to 18 days imprisonment for breach of the Penal Code section 238 (negligently causing serious injury to body or health) and the Road Traffic Act section 3 (general duty to drive with care). In a zone with a 60 km/hr speed limit, he had tried to negotiate an almost 90 degree right hand bend in the road at a speed of 60 km/hr. The bend was clearly marked well ahead. He braked in panic, failed to negotiate the bend and collided with another vehicle coming in the opposite direction. The driver of the other vehicle was injured in the collision. Dissent 3-2. Case history: Trondheim City Court no. 99-00037 A - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1999-00440 M - Supreme Court HR-1999-00089A, case no. 64/1999.
Decision 17. December 1999
A 24-year-old male with previous convictions was sentenced to three years and two months imprisonment, of which 120 days were unconditional, for breach of the Penal Code section 174, first paragraph (counterfeiting money) and section 162, first paragraph, cf. fifth paragraph (complicity in a drug felony). The breach of section 174 concerned aiding and abetting the production of false banknotes amounting to NOK 47 000 using PC-equipment. Imprisonment and community service, which pursuant to the Penal Code section 15 are main penalties, cannot be awarded concurrently. Case history: Agder Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-1999-00069B, case no. 61/1999.
Decision 16. December 1999
The City Court had acquitted the accused of breach of the Act relating to Dispensation from Military Service on the Grounds of Personal Conviction of 19. March 1965 no. 3 section 19, second paragraph, cf. section 20. The City Court had found that there was a breach of the provision, but that Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights on the right to freedom of conscience barred conviction. The acquittal was quashed. The duty to serve military service is excepted from the prohibition against forced or compulsory labour, see Article 4 no. 3 litra b of the European Convention. Article 9 cannot be interpreted to mean that the right to freedom of conscience conveys a right to defy an order to do civil service. A procedural error made in the Court of Appeal was not given effect, see the Criminal Procedure Act section 343. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-1999-00087A, case no. 66/1999.
Decision 15. December 1999
In connection with the financial reorganisation of a general partnership, one of the partners was forcibly bought out. Part of his share of the company debt was waived. The debt reduction was deemed to be a taxable clearance profit pursuant to the Company Taxation Act section 6-7. Dissent 3-2 and separate comments from one of the justices. The administrative decision concerning additional tax was not upheld, see the Tax Assessment Act section 10-2 Case history: Tønsberg City Court no. 97-01507 - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1998-01047 A Supreme Court HR-1999-00068B, no. 138/1999.
Decision 9.December 1999
An application to reopen a second valuation (appraisal) carried out pursuant to the Nature Protection Act section 20, cf. the Civil Procedure Act section 407, first paragraph no. 6, was dismissed. A premise at the second evaluation had been that it was foreseeable that gravel from areas lying outside the nature preservation area could be extracted. However, change of user of the ground was subsequently refused, see the Land Act of 12. May 1995 no. 23 section 9. This was an event that took place after the second valuation and therefore did not give grounds for reopening pursuant to the Civil Procedure Act section 407, first paragraph no. 6. Four Justices stated that the freeholder had the "right at a new valuation to have calculated damages on the supposition that the gravel could not legally be extracted from that part of his property lying outside the preservation zone, unless the administrative decision refusing dispensation was overturned". Appeal against a court order heard by a chamber of the Supreme Court (as opposed to the Appeals Selection Committee of the Supreme Court) pursuant to the Supreme Court Act of 1926 section 6. Case history: Nordmøre District Court no. 94-00983 B - Frostating Court of Appeal LF-1998-00439 B - Supreme Court HR-1999-00067B, interlocutory order journal no. 175/1999.
Decision 8.December 1999
A woman was appointed as supporting guardian (next friend) for her elderly aunt, see the Guardianship Act section 90a. The supporting guardian embezzled her aunt's money, and the local authority was held liable in damages for lack of supervision on the part of the office of the public trustee, see the Damages Act section 2-1. The specific liability provision in the Guardianship Act section 92 does not apply to supporting guardianship pursuant to section 90 a. Case history: Frostating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-1999-00086A, no. 53/1999
Decision 6. December 1999
A 35-year-old male with previous convictions was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment for, inter alia, having killed his seriously ill mother out of compassion, see the Penal Code section 233, first paragraph, cf. section 235, second paragraph. Dissent 3-2. Case history: Supreme Court HR-1999-00066B, case no. 46/1999.
Decision 1. December 1999
Case concerning review of an administrative decision of the County Board for Social Welfare Cases concerning a care order pursuant to the Child Welfare Act. Case history: Stavanger City Court no. 97-00282 - Gulating Court of Appeal LG-1997-01924 A - Supreme Court HR-1999-00084A, no. 124/1999.
Decision 1. December 1999
Two men were given conditional sentences of 75 days and 60 days respectively for indecent assault - sexual intercourse - with a girl who was 15 ½ years old at the date of the crime, see the Penal Code section 196, first paragraph (act of indecency with a person under 16 years of age). The two appellants were aged 20 years and 8 months and 21 years and 2 months respectively at the date of the crime. The Court gave weight to the victim's age, and pointed out that the circumstances of the case were such that the crime almost came within the scope of the Penal Code section 196, fourth paragraph, whereby the penalty can be remitted or imposed below the minimum specified if the act of indecency is committed between persons who are about equal in age and development. The youngest appellant had two previous convictions, and the eldest had previous fines. Dissent 3-2. Case history: Lofoton District Court no. 98-410 M - Hålogaland Court of Appeal LH-1999-00002 and LH-1999-00003 M - Supreme Court HR-1999-00085A, case nos. 41/1999 and 42/1999.
Decision 26. November 1999
The Supreme Court quashed the dismissal by the lower court of a case against an attorney concerning the declaration of nullity of a defamatory statement, see section 253 no. 2 of the Penal Code. A purportedly defamatory statement had been made in a notice of dismissal written by the attorney on behalf of a client. The Court held that when an attorney acts in a non-litigious or non-investigatory capacity, an action may be brought against him for a declaration of nullity of allegations he has made or conveyed on behalf of his client. An attorney cannot seek to have such an action dismissed by later explaining that he does not vouch for the allegations. Such does not amount to a withdrawal of the allegations that he has conveyed. Appeal against a court order heard by a chamber of the Supreme Court (as opposed to the Appeals Selection Committee of the Supreme Court) pursuant to the Supreme Court Act of 1926 section 6. Case history: Gulating Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-1999-00083A, case no. 28/1999.
Decision 29. November 1999
The tenant's right of purchase pursuant to the Owner Tenant Act of 1983 section 10, was statute barred. A right of purchase pursuant to the Act is subject to the rules of limitation contained in the Limitation Act section 3 no. 1, section 10 and section 14. The limitation period was not broken by acknowledgement. The notice to quit was valid, see the Tenancy Act of 1939 section 38. Failure by the tenant to pay rent in order to force the sale of the property amounted to a serious breach. The special protection against termination of tenancy in section 48, third paragraph of the Tenancy Act, does not apply in the event of serious breach. Case history: Oslo City Court no. 97-09509 A/55 - Borgarting Court of Appeal LB-1998.02741 A/02, LB-1998-02742 A/02 - Supreme Court HR-1999-00063B, no. 224/1999.
Decision 1. December 1999
In an injunction order, a publisher was ordered to enclose a corrigendum in a history volume when it was put on sale, due to a defamatory allegation that had been made. The corrigendum was also to be sent to libraries and public institutions that were known to have purchased the volume, see the Act relating to the Legal Enforcement of Claims section 15-6, cf. section 15-1 and section15-2, first paragraph litra b and section 15-8. The allegation was in breach of the Penal Code section 246, section 247 and section 253 no. 1 (various forms of defamation). The injunction was necessary, and not in breach of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 100 of the Norwegian Constitution. Appeal against a court order heard by a chamber of the Supreme Court (as opposed to the Appeals Selection Committee of the Supreme Court) pursuant to the Supreme Court Act of 1926 section 6. Case history: Borgarting Court of Appeal - Supreme Court HR-1999-00064B, interlocutory order journal no. 187/1999.
Decision 1. December 1999
A 22-year-old male with previous convictions was sentenced to two years and six months imprisonment for several breaches of the Penal Code section 195 and section 212 (various counts of indecent assault). He also received an additional five years of preventive supervision. The accused had abused three young boys since they were a year or 18 months old. Case history: Kristiansand City Court no. 98-127 - Agder Court of Appeal LA-1998-01445 - Supreme Court HR-1999-00065B, no. 58/1999.
Judgement 17. November 1999
Case concerning a claim for compensation pursuant to the Damages Act section 3-6, on the grounds that a television broadcasting company (TV2) had published the name and photograph of an assistant nurse who was accused of the murder of 10 residents of a nursing home for the elderly.
Judgement 16. November 1999
The Drammen based brewery AS P. Ltz. Aass, had sold beer under the name “Lundetangen”. The essential issue was whether Aass thereby had committed a tortious breach of Ringnes AS' right to a trademark that was established when it was acquired by Ringnes some 10 years prior to the time when the dispute arose, but that had not been used since.
Judgement 12. November 1999
Sentencing. Drug offence. Storage of 1.2 kilograms of hashish.
Judgement 11. November 1999
Case concerning the validity of a resolution refusing consent to the acquisition of shares in the limited company AS Østlendingen, see the now repealed Limited Companies Act of 4. June 1976 No. 59 section 3-4, third paragraph, third sentence, which provides that refusal to consent must be justifiable.
Judgement 11. November 1999
Case concerning whether the employer’s duty to provide alternative employment pursuant to the Working Environment Act section 60 no. 2, is fulfilled in a situation where the employer offers the dismissed employee another position in the operation and makes the offer of such employment subject to a trial period, see the Working Environment Act section 63.
Judgement 11. November 1999
Kanwarjit Tony Singh Bansi ran a physiotherapy clinic in Blystadlia in the local authority of Rælingen. The local authority entered into an agreement with Bansi, whereby the local authority agreed to subsidise the running costs of the clinic in respect of three private practising physiotherapists at the clinic. The essential issue in the case was whether the local authority was entitled to terminate the contract with Bansi and to reduce the number of private practising physiotherapists in respect of whom the it paid the subsidy, from three to two.
Judgement 5. November 1999
Case concerning the validity of a decision of the inland revenue that unpaid interest on a loan from a holding company to its foreign subsidiary, was liable to tax. The primary issue was whether interest on the loan had been “gained” in the terms of the Taxation Act, or alternatively whether such interest was deductible as a result of waiver.
Judgement 5. November 1999
Case concerning breach of the Schools Act of 13. June 1969 No. 24 section 13 no. 10 (as amended by statute of 19. June 1997 § 13 no. 11), whereby the four appellants – parents A, B, C and D – had kept their children away from compulsory education during the school year 1997-8.
Judgement 1. November 1999
Case concerning a bank’s claim against its customers for the refund of losses incurred in connection with a currency transaction undertaken by a middleman.
Judgement 29. October 1999
Case concerning the conditions for applying the more lenient provision on counterfeiting of money in the Penal Code section 174, second sentence, and sentencing for counterfeiting of money and fraud.
Judgement 29. October 1999
Criminal case. Sentencing. Indecent assault of two daughters and a friend of one of the daughters
Judgement 27 October 1999
Judgement 27 October 1999 A milk supplier and stakeholder in TINE Midt Norge BA (TINE) (a dairy co-operative), brought a civil action for damages against TINE for purported discrepancies in the registering of milk supplies. TINE argued in vain that the case should be dismissed on the grounds that there was an arbitration clause in TINEs statute of incorporation. Remarks concerning the requirement that an arbitration clause must be in writing, cf. the Civil Procedure Act section 452. The Supreme Court found that there was nothing in the travaux preparatoires to the Civil Procedure Act or in court practice to support the assertion that a statute of incorporation could form the basis of acceptance of a valid arbitration agreement. An arbitration clause in a statute of incorporation was not comparable with a clause providing that breach by one party to an agreement can be dealt with in a manner to be determined at the discretion of the other party. The case concerned an appeal against a court order, and was dealt with by a division of the Supreme Court as opposed to the Appeals Selection Committee, pursuant to the Supreme Court Act section 6, second paragraph.
Judgement 27 October 1999
A police officer who was not named but who was identifiable in a photograph in a newspaper article bearing the headline “This is where the police hit”, was awarded NOK 100 000 in damages for defamation, cf. the Penal Code section 247 and the Damages Act section § 3-6. In principle, the newspaper was entitled to publish material from the video film upon which the article was based, but it had not made sufficient inquiries as to whether the force employed by the police was lawfully justified. The Court made remarks concerning the balance between freedom of speech and personal privacy.
Judgement 26. October 1999
In 1973, the Directorate of Hunting, Gaming and Fresh Water Fishing released the crustacean mysis relicta into Selbusjøen (a lake in mid-Norway) in order to increase the fish population that had diminished as a result of a number of waterway regulation projects. The emission resulted in a reduction of the stock of char fish in the lake, and freeholders with fishing rights in there were awarded compensation on the basis of fault liability, cf. the Damages Act section 2-1. The Inland Fishing Act of 1964 section 31 provided sufficient authority for the action taken by the Directorate. Dissent 4-1 regarding the latter issue.
Judgement 20. October 1999
In a case where the appeal proceedings in the Court of Appeal had lasted five weeks, the fact that the judgement was not pronounced until three months later was not a critical procedural error. In the circumstances, nor was it critical that one of the lay judges had been absent on one occasion from a deliberation and voting, cf. the Criminal Procedure Act section 31.
Judgement 19. October 1999
Judgement 19. October 1999 A 32-year-old male with previous fines was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 3 years and six months for breach of the Penal Code section 162, first and second paragraph, cf. fifth paragraph, whereby he had stored approx. 60 grams of heroin and approx. 17 grams of hashish. The heroin had a degree of purity of 27 %, slightly below average. The Court made remarks concerning, inter alia, the relevance of the fact that the accused acts as a police informant.
Judgement 15. September 1999
An excluded heir to an estate in the USA made a claim for his share of the estate against a beneficiary resident in Norway. The suit could be filed in Norway at the ordinary venue pursuant to the Civil Procedure Act section 17 (being the court of the place of residence of the beneficiary). The Court made remarks concerning the Probate Act section 8. The principles of unity and universality of the estate could not exclude the jurisdiction of the Norwegian courts.
Judgement 10. September 1999
A 37-year-old male with previous convictions was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of one year and eight months for breach of the Penal Code section 162, second paragraph cf. first paragraph. He had purchased in excess of 23 grams of heroin with a 35 % degree of purity. The Court referred in its sentencing to previous Supreme Court sentencing practice.
Judgement 10. September 1999
A 35-year-old male with previous convictions was sentenced to twelve years imprisonment for extremely serious drug offences. He had sold approx. 100 kilograms of hashish, approx. 2.05 kilograms of amphetamine, approx. 150 grams of heroin and approx. 480 grams of cocaine. His appeal against the judgement in so far as it related to the confiscation of NOK 2 000 000, being the proceeds of crime, was dismissed, see the Penal Code section 34. The Court stated that it would be offensive to the sense of justice if in a case like this it availed itself of the discretionary power to reduce the amount to be confiscated.
Judgement 9. September 1999
A petition for forced sale was withdrawn when the debtor was placed under compulsory composition. The debtor breached the payment obligations under the composition, which was then discharged. A new petition for forced sale was lodged and resulted in partial recovery. A dispute arose between the first priority mortgagee and the second priority mortgagee as to whether the first priority mortgage included interest accrued up to two years prior to the first petition, or up to two years prior to the second petition, see section 1-5 (b) of the Mortgage Act. The Supreme Court found in favour of the second priority mortgagee, and held that the appropriate petition for determining priority as far as interest is concerned, must be the petition that results in recovery. Dissent 4-1.
Judgement 9. September 1999
Shortly before a lease expired, the lessee claimed an extension. The primary issue was whether the extension could be refused on the grounds that the lessor was obliged pursuant to section 33 of the Lease Act to apply to the King for an extension, or at least to have lodged an application no later than one year prior to the date of expiry of the lease, see the Lease Act section 10 first paragraph. The Supreme Court held that the lessor was entitled to an extension. In the interpretation of the Lease Act section 10, first and second paragraph and the transitional provisions for older leases in sections 32 and 33, the Court gave substantial weight to the need for clarity and foreseeability.
Judgement 9. September 1999
Two men, aged 34 and 27 years, were sentenced in the lower court to 12 and 10 years' imprisonment respectively for breach of the Penal Code section 162, first and third paragraph, first sentence cf. fifth paragraph (drug felonies). The first appellant, who had previous convictions, was also convicted under section 317 of the Penal Code (receiving the proceeds of a criminal act). Together they had imported two kilograms of heroin and 408 grams of amphetamine. Concerning the count of receiving the proceeds of narcotics (Penal Code section 317), the Supreme Court found that the financial gain, which amounted to NOK 75 000, warranted conviction for ordinary receiving (as opposed to aggravated receiving). The Supreme Court was competent to review whether the decision of the Court of Appeal on costs was in compliance with the law, see the Criminal Procedure Act sections 436 and 442. Dissent (4-1) concerning costs.
Judgement 7. September 1999
The conviction of a prison officer for purportedly having assisted a prisoner to escape, see the Penal Code section 131, was quashed. In its evidence, the prosecution had relied on a “statement” recorded using a hidden microphone and tape-recorder. This evidence was deemed to have been acquired unlawfully. The Court stated that it is a fundamental principle of the rule of law that a person who is suspected of a criminal offence shall have the right to remain silent and has no duty to contribute to his own conviction, see the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16. December 1966 Article 14 no. 3 g, the European Convention on Human Rights Article 6 no. 1, and the Criminal Procedure Act section 232.
Judgement 27. August 1999
A 36-year-old female was acquitted of breach of the Penal Code section 349a (discriminatory refusal to supply goods or services). It was purported that she had distributed for remuneration a list of accommodation for rent, where it was indicated that some of the properties were only available for rent to Norwegian citizens in secure employment. Neither the wording of section 349a nor the travaux preparatoires to the provision could be construed to include services offered by a private lessor, in a situation where the service is arranged through a commercial agent.
Judgement 27. August 1999
A 32-year-old male with previous convictions, was sentenced to one year's imprisonment for breach of the Penal Code section 162, second paragraph cf. first paragraph and section 162, first paragraph cf. fifth paragraph (various degrees of drug felony). The offence comprised the acquisition of 440 ecstasy tablets, the sale of 70 of the tablets and the acquisition of 10 grams of amphetamine. The 440 tablets corresponded to approx. 50 grams of so-called “street amphetamine”, i.e. amphetamine with a purity of approx. 50 percent. As in the case reported in Rt. 1996. 170, the Court found that dealing with ecstasy should be treated more harshly than dealing with a corresponding amount of amphetamine.