A woman claimed that a midwife had performed a care procedure without consent in connection with the woman's childbirth and that this meant that the woman's right to protection of bodily integrity under the European Convention or equivalent right to protection under the Instrument of Government had been violated.
She brought an action for damages against the region. The Region conceded to the obligation to pay, but explained that the concession should not be perceived as an admission of any violation of rights. The Region requested that the District Court, without any examination of the merits, should issue a judgment on the basis of the concession. The woman objected to this and brought a declaratory action regarding the violation.
The case in the Supreme Court is thus about how a court should deal with an action for damages when the plaintiff bases it on a violation of fundamental rights and freedoms, and the defendant concedes the plaintiff's claim but at the same time explains that the concession does not imply an admission that there has been a violation (a so-called impure concession).
A person who, on reasonable grounds, claims that his or her fundamental rights and freedoms have been violated, has the right to have the claim tried. Where the defendant makes an impure concession, the court should apply the procedural rules in such a way that the court rules on the basis of the concession and, at the same time, in the context of an action for a declaratory judgment, whether there has been an infringement of rights.
Case no. Ö 438-24
Case name
"The region's concession"
Contact
Press contact
Telephone
08-561 666 30
Email
HDO-Presskontakt@dom.se