Latest decision summaries

  • Date of Decision:7/27/2017 Reg.No:803-2017

    Severe criticism of Försäkringskassan for slow processing in cases on insurance affiliation and child benefits

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:7/13/2017 Reg.No:2017-2015

    Criticism of the Prison and Probation Service, Södertörn Probation Authority, for the processing of a personal case study

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:7/12/2017 Reg.No:1145-2016

    Criticism of the Competition Authority for a number of failures when processing a case on the suspected abuse of a dominant position

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:6/29/2017 Reg.No:2447-2015

    Report against the Care and Nursing Administration of Karlstad Municipality that an elderly woman at a nursing home was not permitted to make video calls on her tablet in the nursing home’s common areas

    Hide information


    A woman, born in 1937, was granted assistance in the form of a nursing home with home-help service. She lived in her own apartment at the nursing home in accordance with a special rental contract. The rental contract was accompanied by a right to spend time in the nursing home’s common areas. The question in the Parliamentary Ombudsmen’s case is whether the administration had reason to notify the woman that she was not permitted to use her tablet for video calls in the nursing home’s common areas due to the rules of order that applied for the nursing home.

    When several people live in a housing unit, it may in the view of the Parliamentary Ombudsmen be necessary for several reasons to have certain rules of order regarding the common living environment, which among other things aim to create security and comfort for all who live there. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen therefore see no inherent obstacle to certain rules of order being set up for common areas at a housing unit.

    In the assessment of whether the administration had reason for its notice to the woman, one must take into account the woman’s strive to live like anyone else to the furthest extent possible and her right to self-determination, as well as the justified interest of the respect for the integrity of other residents.

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen state that, depending among other things on individual needs and wishes of the elderly and the structure of the premises, it should be possible to find practical solutions without disregarding any of the above interests.

    In light of this, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen doubt that the woman was entirely prohibited as a result of the municipality’s rules of order from making video calls on her tablet in the nursing home’s common areas. The administration should have reasonably been able to arrange the matter so that the woman could have made her calls without it entailing any conflict with other interests in the operations. However, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen do not consider there to be adequate reason to express any criticism against the administration.

  • Date of Decision:6/22/2017 Reg.No:4945-2016

    Criticism of the Swedish Police Authority inter alia for a woman who was taken into custody for intoxication not being permitted to use the toilet during the night, and for the woman not being offered anything to cover herself with

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:6/21/2017 Reg.No:6930-2016

    Criticism of a teacher who, during an ongoing custody dispute, expressed an opinion about the other parent in an email to one of the child’s parents in a way that was not neutral

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:6/15/2017 Reg.No:6153-2016

    Severe criticism of an official at the Urban Planning Committee in the municipality of Täby for its treatment of an individual in email correspondence with that individual

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:6/15/2017 Reg.No:3197-2016

    Criticism of Hässelby-Vällingby District Council in the Municipality of Stockholm for slow processing of a request for photographs and videos

    Read more