had special legal consequences,whichwere in contrast to the contracts within the rest of property law. He emphasised that the largely new types of labour contracts were too important to be treated as capricious exceptions from the traditional institution and thus it was important to know what legal norms should be applied.The rules concerning the “real” hiring of services were useless and the master and servant contract was not applicable.241 As was stated above, this problem had been discussed for decades. However, all except one of the previous legal commentators had confined themselves to a brief remark about the problem.The exception was paradoxically enough Schrevelius, whom Folke Schmidt has placed as Winroth’s alleged counterpart. In 1844 Schrevelius noted that Swedish law did not regulate the “general” service contract and that applicable rules had to be derived from In1878Winroth wrote that it would probably be most proper to apply those rules concerning a legal master-servant relationship that possessed p a r t 1 i i , c h a p t e r 4 114 241 “Deras tillvaro och deras, trots frånvaron af lagligt bemyndigande, i allt väsentligt subordinerande under det förra (tjänstehjonsavtalet) visa tillbaka på en för dem egendomlig gemensam juridisk karakter af en särskildt rättsalstrande kraft, alltför stark att kunna undertryckas af de positiva stadganden, hvarmed lagstiftarne af en eller annan orsak sökt gifva aftalet gränser och former. Denna karakter är just, efter hvad ovan blifvit nämndt, de skyldiga tjensteprœstationernas frihet från ett förut gifvet innehåll, deras obestämdhet”.Winroth 1878, pp. 10-11. 242 “…dels af sakens natur och allmän praxis, dels af de särskilda bestämmelser, som finnas, angående vissa arter af sådan tjenstelega, för så vidt de samma äro af en mera allmän användbarhet…”. Schrevelius 1847, pp. 551-554; See also Schrevelius 1872, pp. 195-196. 243 “…der dessa ega en mera ur sjelfva aftalets karakter härledd väsentlig eller naturlig beskaffenhet. Hafva de åter af historiskt förklarliga skäl erhållit en positivt egendomlig gestaltning, “the nature of things and prevalent custom as well as from the available rules concerning particular types of hiring of services, as far as they are of more general usefulness”.242 “…a more essential or natural quality, which is derived from the very character of the contract. If, however, they for historically explainable reasons have acquired a positively peculiar configuration, one has to in this respect probably resort to the principles that in general are applied in the law of obligations and to service contracts.” 243
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=