hh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparison of the Swedish and the German contracting regulations: AB92-VOB/B A guide for bilateral enterprise between Sweden and Germany for the Construction Sector
Halmstad University, School of Business and Engineering (SET).
Halmstad University, School of Business and Engineering (SET).
2001 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (One Year))Student thesis
Abstract [en]
Each of the two countries, Sweden and Germany, have their contracting regulations. Both are in use for many years and have developed to a very high level. Similarities can be found, and contrasts. Since both countries are close to each other, and Swedish companies strove to the German market, suffering high losses because of the different cultures, it is interesting to have a closer look on both contracting regulations. The AB92 gives the contractor the right and the duty to execute additional or changed works. According to the VOB/B, the contractor has the duty to execute additional or changed works on request of the client, but he has no claim for it. The client has in many articles of the VOB/B a more advantageous position in comparision to the AB92. The AB92 gives explecite requirements, if something has to be done in written form. To compensate the client for time delay, the AB92 and the VOB/B give the possibility of contract penality or legal actions for damages, but according to the AB92 only one of these possibilities can be used. The VOB/B allows the use of both independently. From economy to acceptance and from termination to contested matters interesting differences and astonishing similarities are to be named. As examples can be named the very quick periods for payment in the VOB/B. The fact that in Germany a proper acceptance inspection is not mandatory, nor is the acceptance as detailed and well organised as in Sweden. The difference between the proper and the extraordinary termination of the contract in opposite to the very limited termination reasons in the AB 92 But in general one can say that both regulations are build on the same structure, they have the same headlines and for the majority of issues, they give similar regulations
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2001.
Keyword [en]
construction, regulations, contract, AB92, VOB/B, swedish construction contracts, german construction contracts
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-9993Local ID: U4821OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hh-9993DiVA: diva2:365103
Uppsok
Technology
Note
Denna uppsats kan beställas från arkivet / This paper can be ordered from the archive. Kontakta / Contact: arkivet@hh.seAvailable from: 2010-11-09 Created: 2010-11-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

By organisation
School of Business and Engineering (SET)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Total: 45 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf