c o n t i n u i t y a n d c o n t r ac t 235 master-servant contract. Further, it can be seen that during the first decades of the 20th century, many Swedish debaters, employers, conservatives as well as certain liberals supported the employers’ section23 prerogatives with general references to “the nature of things”, rather than to concrete, established customs. How were these questions analysed in the meagre legal science doctrine during the years 1885-1930? The Swedish legal scholars of that period hardly showed any fresh ideas about how to analyse the new types of relationships between employers and workers.476 A general feature for a long time was that the work relationship could be based only on individual agreements in accordance with the established private law doctrines of the 19th century.477 Some authors, however, paid attention to the increasing significance of collective agreements. Ernst Viktor Nordling (1832-1898) was, among other things, professor of legal history at Uppsala University.As late as in the middle of the 1920s he was considered as having exerted a strong influence on the development of law, and many of his thoughts are said to be found in the Swedish legislation of that time.478 Regarding the view of legal sources, Nordling shows a clear affinity with Savigny. In his lectures for Uppsala law students during the latter half of the 19th century, he emphasised that legal principles could certainly originate from different sources, such as custom, legislation, practice and doctrine.The common source for all these, however, according to Nordling was “the general legal consciousness” (Sw.det allmänna rättsmedvetandet) from which all other sources were only “outflows” (utflöden).479 Nordling 476 See, however, Rydin 1892; Hildebrand 1899, p. 5. 477 Göransson 1988, pp. 110, 155-159, 169-170;Westerståhl 1945, p. 282. 478 Björling 1923-37. 479 Nordling 1891, p. 35; Nordling 1913, pp. 30-35.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=