EPTOn October 01 2013 00:50 HardlyNever wrote:
However, it seems weird to me that the Swedish government now feels the need to codify this specific case ruling into a standing law. Clearly, I don't have a full understanding how of the Swedish legal system works, and maybe this is just how they have to do it now that they have made the ruling on this particular case (and they can't have standing case-law). If that is what is going on, then this entire thing seems pretty sensationalist.
However, it seems weird to me that the Swedish government now feels the need to codify this specific case ruling into a standing law. Clearly, I don't have a full understanding how of the Swedish legal system works, and maybe this is just how they have to do it now that they have made the ruling on this particular case (and they can't have standing case-law). If that is what is going on, then this entire thing seems pretty sensationalist.
It's a single ruling for a specific case at a low instance. It doesn't mean jack shit. Sensationalist is an understatement.
