the individual contract of employment has received less emphasis, several authors have discussed the labour court’s disclosure of implicit terms in collective agreements in a way that implies certain assumptions about individual agreements.7 Some writers have – critically or with loyalty – discussed the indispensable preceding step, namely the presupposition that the employee’s far-reaching duty of obedience is a “natural part” of the individual contract. Obviously the labour court as well as legal scholars have had considerable difficulties in defining the theoretical foundation of some essential natural principles of 20th century labour law. In the next three parts (ii, iii and iv) of this study a number of issues will be specified and related to current research. Already at this stage, however we will stress some general sources of information. Tore Sigeman has pointed out the significant role that has been performed by the Swedish Labour Court, in particular by elaborating “standard interpretation rules”. The most important of them is the 29/29-principle, which presupposes that an individual contract of employment as well as a collective agreement is furnished with a collection of natural, general principles of law.8 According to Kent Källström, Swedish labour law, as the labour court has developed it, can be characterised as reluctant to receive influences from values of other legal areas. One explanation might be found in the labour court’s “teleological”method for finding the law which results in a view that overestimates and isolates norms from the internal system.9 Some legal historians have observed the indecisiveness that characterised many 19th century Swedish scholars when analysing the new types of labour contracts that emerged alongside c o n t i n u i t y a n d c o n t r ac t 21 7 Petrén, G1944, pp. 116-131; Bergström1948, pp. 18-19;Adlercreutz,A1954; Schmidt, F 1957, pp. 203-234; Geijer, & Schmidt 1958, pp. 294-295; Schmidt, F 1959; SOU 1975:1, Demokrati på arbetsplatsen, pp. 400-402;Victorin1979; Sigeman1984; Hydén, 1985;Victorin1986; Göransson1988; Svensäter 1991; Malmberg 1997; Rimsten1998; Hasselbalch 2002; Hållfast arbetsrätt…2002. 8 Sigeman 1978. 9 Källström1993.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=