Påföljdsbestämningen i Sverige och straffutmålingen i Norge : med en studie av rättsfall från Högsta domstolen och Höyesterett

The thesis is concerned with the penal theories. The general opinion is that it is neoclassicism that mainly motivates sentencing in Sweden but not in Norway. The penal theories concerning sentencing in Norway is supposed to be a combination of theories between general deterrence and special deterrence with elements of retribution. If this is the case this should be evident from a comparison between the two countries´ sentencing norms and criminal cases from the Supreme Courts in Sweden and Norway. The most interesting issue is therefore, if and in what way the sentencing norms and criminal cases differ and if the differences can be explained with reference to different penal theories.The systematisation, analysis and interpretation of the law in Sweden and Norway and the result of the study of the criminal cases show that there is in principle no difference between the countries concerning the theoretical motivation of the penal law. It is principally a combination between general and special deterrence with elements of retribution that motivates sentencing norms in both countries. The difference between the countries lies rather in the fact that while there are two chapters with sentencing rules in the Penal Code in Sweden, no general rules on the principles of sentencing or only a few specific ones exist in Norway. The Supreme Courts cases in Norway play instead a significant role in guiding the lower courts. Inauguration of conditional imprisonment is suggested as this punishment makes the sentencing more flexible. Questions discussed in the thesis are: Is it possible to combine general deterrence and special deterrence with retribution, or is such a combination of penal theories incoherent? Were there any other motives than the penal theories that led to the changes of the Penal Code in Sweden 1989?