Suit yourself?

Violation of a person’s integrity through crime is a non-financial damage regulated in the Tort Liability Act, Chapter 2, section 3. The provision states that for liability to be imposed on the perpetrator, it is required that the violation is caused through crime and that the violation is assessed as serious. Whether a violation is considered serious depends on all relevant circumstances surrounding the offence. These circumstances can either be related to the criminal offence itself, the perpetrator, or the victim. Through a legal dogmatic method, the overall purpose of this thesis has been to contribute with an understanding of the concept of violation and its distinctive features, with a special focus on victim-related circumstances. By studying the development in case law, both from the Swedish supreme court and lower courts, and guiding decisions from the Swedish Crime Victim Authority, the analysis has shown that if a victim, prior to the violation, behaves reprehensibly it may indicate that the victim is not safeguarding his or her integrity. This may lead to the perpetrator not being liable for damages, or in the alternative, that the damages are reduced. The thesis has sought to provide an answer to when and how the victim’s behavior affects his or her right to get compensated for a violation through crime. Although the victim’s behavior can affect the assessment of the violation in hand, the thesis has shown that the victim’s own perception of the violation is not of primary importance to whether he or she should get compensated. This is because the assessment of the damages shall be based on objective criteria where prevailing ethical and social values are of interest. Therefore, one could argue that the damages for violation through crime is intended to compensate for the criminal offence itself rather than to compensate for any actual harm. In this way, the provision on violation through crime distinguish from other types of dam- ages that are governed by the Tort Liability Act. The opposition between different interests – such as subjective/objective and violation/harm – has shown that the concept of violation is struggling with an inherent conflict and ambivalence. In accordance with the purpose of this thesis, attention has been drawn to the concept of violation and its ambivalent nature in order to highlight its characteristics and distinctive features