PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 8307/11) against the Kingdom of Sweden lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Swedish national, Mr Sven Olof Göthlin (“the applicant”), on 9 November 2010.

The applicant, who had been granted legal aid, was represented by Mr A. Grahn, a lawyer practising in Falun. The Swedish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr O. Widgren, of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.

The applicant complained, in particular, about the proportionality of the detention order under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention.

On 12 September 2012 the application was communicated to the Government.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1943 and lives in Sundborn.

A. The writ of execution

On 8 September 2009 the Enforcement Authority (Kronofogdemyndigheten) in Falun issued a writ of execution (beslut om utmätning) attaching a mobile sawmill belonging to the applicant. It noted that the applicant’s total enforceable tax debts amounted to SEK 246,199 (roughly EUR 27,300) and that the sawmill had an estimated value of SEK 300,000 (roughly EUR 33,400). The Authority decided to leave the sawmill in the applicant’s possession but informed him that he was not allowed to sell or dispose of it or otherwise make use of it in a way that might negatively affect its value.

The applicant appealed against the decision to the District Court (tingsrätten) of Falun and also requested the Enforcement Authority to stay the sale of the sawmill while the court considered the case. The request for the interim measure was granted on 29 September 2009.

On 1 February 2010 the District Court rejected the applicant’s appeal and upheld the writ of execution. The interim measure was consequently also lifted.

Upon further appeal by the applicant, both the Svea Court of Appeal (hovrätten) and the Supreme Court (Högsta domstolen) refused leave to appeal, the latter on 6 May 2010.

B. The applicant’s detention

On 22 April 2010 the Enforcement Authority contacted the applicant in order to plan the sale of the attached sawmill. In his reply a few days later, the applicant stated that he had removed the sawmill from his property and hidden it. He also submitted a written statement specifying that he had removed and hidden the sawmill, alone when no one else was at home.

On 5 May 2010 the Enforcement Authority visited the applicant’s property and confirmed that the sawmill was no longer there. The Authority also handed the applicant a summons for questioning on 7 May 2010 on its premises, as well as an injunction in which he was ordered to provide the Authority with the necessary information to be able to recuperate the sawmill. The injunction also informed the applicant that, according to Chapter 4, section 14, of the Enforcement Code (Utsökningsbalken), he was duty-bound to give information about his assets and their location. It further informed him of the Authority’s intention to ask the District Court to detain him if he did not cooperate.

At the questioning, the applicant acknowledged that he knew that the sawmill was attached and that he was not allowed to dispose of it in any way. However, since he considered that the basis for the attachment was wrong, he had decided to hide it. He stated that he took full responsibility for his actions and that nobody but him had been involved or knew where the sawmill was. He refused to give any information about its whereabouts but admitted that he had driven some distance with it around mid-April 2010. He further claimed that it could be only partly in his possession and that he was not sure that he could retrieve it if he wanted to. He stated that he had even considered setting fire to the sawmill. Meanwhile, the applicant’s wife was also questioned. She informed the Enforcement Authority that she had no information about where the sawmill was hidden.

On 17 May 2010 the Enforcement Authority requested the District Court to detain the applicant because he had refused to cooperate and give the required information. It relied on Chapter 2, section 16, and Chapter 4, section 14, of the Enforcement Code. On the same day, the District Court assigned a public defender for the applicant.

The applicant opposed the measure and claimed that it would be in violation of Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention to detain him and that no extraordinary reasons for such a measure existed.

On 27 May 2010, after having held an oral hearing, the District Court rejected the Enforcement Authority’s request. It first considered that Swedish legislation on this point did not contravene the said provisions in the Convention. The question was whether there were extraordinary reasons to detain the applicant. In this respect, the court noted that the writ of execution had gained legal force on 6 May 2010 when the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal. Thus, the court held, only a short time had passed since the matter had been finally resolved. It further observed that the Enforcement Authority had not resorted to any other measures in order to convince the applicant to reveal the location of the property, such as imposing a conditional fine. Whilst recognising that the applicant so far had been reluctant to give any information about the location of the sawmill, the court found that it could not be ruled out that a less severe coercive measure would alter his attitude. Consequently, the court concluded that currently there did not exist such extraordinary reasons to detain the applicant.

The Enforcement Authority appealed to the Court of Appeal, maintaining its claims and adding that, according to the preparatory works of the Enforcement Code, it was only necessary that the debtor had received an injunction but refused to comply with it. It further submitted that having regard to the applicant’s stance on the matter, the imposition of a conditional fine would most likely have no effect. Lastly, the Authority stated that it had reported the applicant to the police on the ground that he had committed a breach of an official order when he had removed and hidden the sawmill.

The applicant opposed the appeal, maintaining his claims and adding that he considered that, if he were detained, it would amount to imprisonment to obtain a confession. In his view, it would be clearly disproportionate to the aim pursued to detain him.

On 28 June 2010 the Court of Appeal quashed the lower court’s decision and granted the Enforcement Authority’s request. It stated that a debtor had to give necessary information about his assets and failure to do so could result in the debtor being detained, if there were extraordinary reasons for detention. Moreover, it was not necessary to impose a fine initially. Having regard to the size of the debts, the value of the hidden property and the fact that the applicant had maintained his refusal to reveal its location, the Court of Appeal found that there were extraordinary reasons to detain the applicant and that detention was proportionate to the aim pursued. In reaching its decision, the court found that the measure did not breach the Convention. Lastly, it noted that it should be informed as soon as the applicant had been detained in order to hold a hearing as to the continued detention.

The applicant was detained the following day. Consequently, on 30 June 2010, the Court of Appeal held an oral hearing and decided to maintain its earlier decision. At the hearing, the applicant stated that the taxes and the attachment had been imposed on him wrongly and that as long as these errors had not been corrected he would not cooperate to bring back the sawmill. The court reiterated its reasons as stated in its earlier decision and added that the applicant’s detention should be reviewed every second week and that he should be released immediately if he revealed the location of the property. Moreover, under no circumstances could the applicant be kept in detention for more than three months.

The applicant appealed to the Supreme Court which, on 6 July 2010, refused leave to appeal.

On 13 July 2010 the District Court reviewed the applicant’s detention and held a new hearing in the case as required by Chapter 2, section 16, of the Enforcement Code. The Enforcement Authority maintained that the applicant should be kept in detention since he still had not given any information about the location of the sawmill. It stated that it had not been able to undertake any investigative measures, since the applicant had stated that he had taken the sawmill far away from his property by car and its whereabouts thus were unknown to the Authority. The applicant, who requested his immediate release, maintained his refusal to give any information about the location of the sawmill and claimed, inter alia, that he suffered from high blood pressure and panic anxiety attacks, causing him difficulties sleeping. Moreover, he stated that he had recently been treated for prostate cancer and that he was not allowed to take his normal medication against his panic attacks since it contained narcotic substances. In its decision, the District Court noted that the applicant maintained his refusal to reveal the whereabouts of the sawmill and found, having regard to the proportionality of the measure, that there were extraordinary reasons for the applicant’s continued detention. Hence, the District Court decided that he should remain in custody.

The applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal which, on 20 July 2010, rejected the appeal. Upon further appeal, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal since a new decision had already been taken by the District Court at that time.

On 27 July 2010 the District Court again reviewed the detention and held a new hearing in the case. The Enforcement Authority maintained its earlier point of view and acknowledged that no investigative measure had been possible due to the applicant’s continued refusal to cooperate. The applicant maintained his earlier position and added that he suffered from asthmatic symptoms due to the dry air in custody. Having regard to his age and health problems, he considered that it was clearly disproportionate to prolong his detention. The District Court found that there were still extraordinary reasons for the applicant’s continued detention and that it was not disproportionate to the aim pursued. It thus ordered that he should remain in custody.

The applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal which, on 2 August 2010, rejected the appeal. On 5 August 2010 the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal.

On 9 August 2010 the District Court once again reviewed the detention and held a hearing in the case. The parties maintained their earlier standpoints. The District Court found that continued detention of the applicant would be disproportionate to the measures he had taken. Hence, the District Court concluded that there were no extraordinary reasons for the applicant’s continued detention. As a consequence, the District Court ordered his immediate release and the order was implemented the same day.

The Enforcement Authority appealed to the Court of Appeal which, on 13 August 2010, rejected the appeal.

On 7 September 2010 the Supreme Court dismissed the Enforcement Authority’s further appeal and consequently, on 23 September 2010, the District Court struck the case out of its list of cases as the case was closed.

As concerns the Enforcement Authority’s police report concerning the applicant’s alleged breach of an official order pursuant to Chapter 17, section 13, of the Penal Code (Brottsbalken), the preliminary investigation was discontinued with reference to provisions on waiver of prosecution (åtalsunderlåtelse) on 13 April 2011.

On 4 October 2011 the Enforcement Authority decided to revoke the writ of execution concerning the sawmill since it considered that no additional circumstances had emerged that could reveal its location. Furthermore, it was considered that there were no other measures which could produce results to that end.

C. The complaint to the Chancellor of Justice

On 26 April 2012 the applicant submitted a claim for damages to the Chancellor of Justice (Justitiekanslern), pursuant to the Act on Compensation for Deprivation of Liberty and Other Coercive Measures (Lagen om ersättning vid frihetsberövande och andra tvångsåtgärder, 1998:714), in the amount of SEK 80,000 for the suffering he had endured during the 42 days he was deprived of his liberty. He further demanded to be reimbursed SEK 2,940 for costs which had been deducted from his pension during his time in detention.

On 15 October 2012 the Chancellor of Justice rejected the claim. The Chancellor noted that the decision to detain the applicant had been taken by a court of law, in accordance with relevant legal provisions. Moreover, the examination of the case showed no basis for finding that the decision had been taken on erroneous grounds and therefore was incorrect.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e1
001-147045_a7_em1
CODE
DIRECT
8307/11
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-147045_a7_e2
001-147045_a7_em2
ORG
NO_MASK
Kingdom of Sweden
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e3
001-147045_a7_em3
DEM
QUASI
Swedish
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e4
001-147045_a7_em4
PERSON
DIRECT
Mr Sven Olof Göthlin
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e5
001-147045_a7_em5
DATETIME
QUASI
9 November 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e6
001-147045_a7_em6
PERSON
QUASI
Mr A. Grahn
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e7
001-147045_a7_em7
LOC
QUASI
Falun
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e8
001-147045_a7_em8
ORG
NO_MASK
Swedish Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e9
001-147045_a7_em9
PERSON
QUASI
Mr O. Widgren
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e10
001-147045_a7_em10
ORG
NO_MASK
Ministry for Foreign Affairs
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e11
001-147045_a7_em11
DATETIME
QUASI
12 September 2012
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e12
001-147045_a7_em12
DATETIME
QUASI
1943
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e13
001-147045_a7_em13
LOC
QUASI
Sundborn
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e14
001-147045_a7_em14
DATETIME
QUASI
8 September 2009
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em15
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority (Kronofogdemyndigheten)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-147045_a7_e7
001-147045_a7_em16
LOC
QUASI
Falun
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em17
MISC
QUASI
mobile sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e17
001-147045_a7_em18
QUANTITY
QUASI
SEK 246,199 (roughly EUR 27,300)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em19
MISC
QUASI
001-147045_a7_em17
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e18
001-147045_a7_em20
QUANTITY
QUASI
SEK 300,000 (roughly EUR 33,400)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em21
ORG
NO_MASK
001-147045_a7_em15
Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em22
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em23
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court (tingsrätten)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-147045_a7_e7
001-147045_a7_em24
LOC
QUASI
Falun
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em25
ORG
NO_MASK
001-147045_a7_em15
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em26
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e20
001-147045_a7_em27
DATETIME
QUASI
29 September 2009
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e21
001-147045_a7_em28
DATETIME
QUASI
1 February 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em29
ORG
NO_MASK
001-147045_a7_em23
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e22
001-147045_a7_em30
ORG
NO_MASK
Svea Court of Appeal (hovrätten)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e23
001-147045_a7_em31
ORG
NO_MASK
Supreme Court (Högsta domstolen)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e24
001-147045_a7_em32
DATETIME
QUASI
6 May 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e25
001-147045_a7_em33
DATETIME
QUASI
22 April 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em34
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em35
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em36
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em37
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e26
001-147045_a7_em38
DATETIME
QUASI
5 May 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em39
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em40
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em41
ORG
NO_MASK
Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e27
001-147045_a7_em42
DATETIME
QUASI
7 May 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em43
ORG
NO_MASK
Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em44
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em45
ORG
NO_MASK
Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em46
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em47
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em48
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e28
001-147045_a7_em49
DATETIME
QUASI
mid-April 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em50
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e29
001-147045_a7_em51
PERSON
NO_MASK
applicant’s wife
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em52
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em53
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e30
001-147045_a7_em54
DATETIME
QUASI
17 May 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em55
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em56
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em57
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e31
001-147045_a7_em58
DATETIME
QUASI
27 May 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em59
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em60
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e3
001-147045_a7_em61
DEM
QUASI
Swedish
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e24
001-147045_a7_em62
DATETIME
QUASI
6 May 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e23
001-147045_a7_em63
ORG
NO_MASK
001-147045_a7_em31
Supreme Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em64
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em65
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em66
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e22
001-147045_a7_em67
ORG
NO_MASK
001-147045_a7_em30
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em68
ORG
NO_MASK
Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em69
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e32
001-147045_a7_em70
DATETIME
QUASI
28 June 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e22
001-147045_a7_em71
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em72
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e22
001-147045_a7_em73
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e33
001-147045_a7_em74
DATETIME
QUASI
30 June 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e22
001-147045_a7_em75
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em76
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e34
001-147045_a7_em77
DATETIME
NO_MASK
every second week
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e35
001-147045_a7_em78
DATETIME
NO_MASK
more than three months
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e23
001-147045_a7_em79
ORG
NO_MASK
Supreme Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e36
001-147045_a7_em80
DATETIME
QUASI
6 July 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e37
001-147045_a7_em81
DATETIME
QUASI
13 July 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em82
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em83
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em84
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em85
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em86
ORG
NO_MASK
Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em87
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
ETHNIC
insert
001-147045_a7_e38
001-147045_a7_em88
MISC
QUASI
high blood pressure
HEALTH
insert
001-147045_a7_e39
001-147045_a7_em89
MISC
QUASI
panic anxiety attacks
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e40
001-147045_a7_em90
MISC
NO_MASK
difficulties sleeping
HEALTH
insert
001-147045_a7_e41
001-147045_a7_em91
MISC
QUASI
prostate cancer
HEALTH
insert
001-147045_a7_e39
001-147045_a7_em92
MISC
QUASI
001-147045_a7_em89
panic attacks
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em93
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em94
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em95
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e22
001-147045_a7_em96
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e42
001-147045_a7_em97
DATETIME
QUASI
20 July 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e23
001-147045_a7_em98
ORG
NO_MASK
Supreme Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em99
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e43
001-147045_a7_em100
DATETIME
QUASI
27 July 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em101
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em102
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
HEALTH
insert
001-147045_a7_e44
001-147045_a7_em103
MISC
NO_MASK
asthmatic symptoms due to the dry air in custody
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em104
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e22
001-147045_a7_em105
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e45
001-147045_a7_em106
DATETIME
QUASI
2 August 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e46
001-147045_a7_em107
DATETIME
QUASI
5 August 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e23
001-147045_a7_em108
ORG
NO_MASK
Supreme Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e47
001-147045_a7_em109
DATETIME
QUASI
9 August 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em110
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em111
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em112
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em113
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em114
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e22
001-147045_a7_em115
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e48
001-147045_a7_em116
DATETIME
QUASI
13 August 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e49
001-147045_a7_em117
DATETIME
QUASI
7 September 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e23
001-147045_a7_em118
ORG
NO_MASK
Supreme Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em119
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e50
001-147045_a7_em120
DATETIME
QUASI
23 September 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e19
001-147045_a7_em121
ORG
NO_MASK
District Court
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em122
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e51
001-147045_a7_em123
DATETIME
QUASI
13 April 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e52
001-147045_a7_em124
DATETIME
QUASI
4 October 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e15
001-147045_a7_em125
ORG
NO_MASK
Enforcement Authority
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e16
001-147045_a7_em126
MISC
QUASI
sawmill
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e53
001-147045_a7_em127
ORG
NO_MASK
001-147045_a7_em129
Chancellor of Justice
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e54
001-147045_a7_em128
DATETIME
QUASI
26 April 2012
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e53
001-147045_a7_em129
ORG
NO_MASK
Chancellor of Justice (Justitiekanslern)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e55
001-147045_a7_em130
QUANTITY
QUASI
SEK 80,000
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e56
001-147045_a7_em131
DATETIME
QUASI
42 days
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-147045_a7_e57
001-147045_a7_em132
QUANTITY
QUASI
SEK 2,940
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e58
001-147045_a7_em133
DATETIME
QUASI
15 October 2012
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-147045_a7_e53
001-147045_a7_em134
ORG
NO_MASK
Chancellor of Justice
Sven Olof Göthlin
SWE
CHAMBER
Task: Annotate the document to anonymise the following person: Sven Olof Göthlin