justitia et prudentia, kapitel 7 374 commonly used. Another argument frequently used in the pleas of various parties was an emphasis on the need to love and cherish the next of kin. Attitudes to the idea of property changed during the period under study with a stronger emphasis on the right of the individuals to control and dispose of their property as they wished. The importance of such a doctrine becomes clearer if placed in its political and social context. During the 17th century, the control of property moved to a great extent from the family to the individual. The wishes of the individual were highlighted in a completely new manner, which is expressed, not least, in the documents on wills. This development came about because society itself had changed, but also had its origins in the views on individual rights of property ownership expressed in natural law. Thanks to the legal developments that had taken place during the 17th century, individuals from the upper levels of society expected to be able to decide for themselves about their property, at least that they had acquired themselves. This attitude was based, among other things, on the views that had evolved through the praxis of the courts of appeal, which in turn was often based on the principle of freedom of contract. Both the parties to a disputed will and the members of the bench often referred to precedent from the Svea Court of Appeal concerning the right of testators to dispose of their property as they wished. The Svea Court of Appeal in Stockholm distributed collections of precedents to the new courts of appeal and was particularly careful in following its own praxis and new interpretations in its own judgments. In turn, the other courts of appeal sent their judgments to the Svea Court of Appeal and to the Crown with the purpose of creating a consistent code of conduct and application of the law. On the other hand, there were few references to the laws of other countries, in general and to Roman law, in particular. The Svea Court of Appeal referred to some points of Roman law in its 1685 report on the law of wills, but then primarily to point out that the terms of Roman law were so special that they could not be applied to Swedish conditions. Laws of other countries are not specifically mentioned by name, but are referred to more generally as ‘the laws of other countries’. Johan Stiernhöök, a 17th century Swedish lawyer, is an example of someone who exploited legislation from other countries on a number of occasions. In previous research into Swedish legal history, Stiernhöök has been seen as a supporter of national law, but he made use of the legal rules of other countries when they suited his
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=