c o n t i n u i t y a n d c o n t r ac t 243 tion was already regulated by general basic principles, analogies from other fields and existing customs. However, these rules probably ought to be replaced by others, something that could be done by legislation. He primarily pointed here to the need to establish a special court of arbitration after the Danish model and referred to many cases from the DanishVoldgiftsret.494 Undén would later many times support the demand for compulsory arbitration in legal disputes and the establishment of a special labour court. HugoWikander (b. 1879), who was associate professor of private law in Uppsala and a judge on the court of appeal, departed from the main current by questioning whether the worker’s farreaching duty of obedience was a natural component of the service contract. He admitted that there were a number of statements in the literature that pointed in that direction.The employee placed his labour at disposal for a certain amount of time upon entering into the service contract, but for a certain limited project when the contract of piecework was entered into. The opinion was also found that in the case of the service contract, the parties should stand opposite each other as master and servant, while when the contract of piecework was entered into they met as independent parties. With references to Winroth, and others,Wikander argued that the authors inserted an independent position for management of the contract of piecework regarding the way the work was done. In the case of a service contract, on the other hand, the authors claimed that the person who was under obligation to work submitted his or her personal ability and strength under the person who was entitled to the service, in other words a kind of subordination. Wikander rejected that view. Historically, he wrote, there was perhaps some support for the rules regarding the service contract Wikander 494 Undén 1916, pp. 4-35.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=