§ 34. Which claims the Debt Collection Act applies to

§ 34 is a transitional provision. It explains which cases the Debt Collection Act was to apply to when the Act entered into force.

When a new law takes effect, there are often cases already under way. Some claims fell due before the law started. Some claims fall due afterwards. Some cases have already been sent to debt collection (inkasso). Others are sent to debt collection after the law enters into force. Without transitional rules, it can be unclear which set of rules applies.

§ 34 solves this for the Debt Collection Act. It says two things.

First, the Act applies to the collection of monetary claims that fall due after the Act enters into force. Due date (forfall) means the date the claim should have been paid. If the bill falls due after the Act has started to apply, the Debt Collection Act applies to the collection.

Second, the Act also applies to the collection of monetary claims that a debt collector is instructed to collect after the Act enters into force. This means that even if the claim fell due before the Act started, the Act can apply if the debt collector only received the assignment afterwards.

This made the transition tidier. The Act was not only to apply to new claims. It was also to apply to debt collection assignments given after it entered into force.

Today, § 34 is mostly of historical interest. The Debt Collection Act entered into force on 1 October 1989. For ordinary debt collection cases today, the transition is long past. But the provision shows how the Act was to be applied to claims around its starting date.

What is a transitional provision?

A transitional provision is a rule that tells you how to move from old rules to new rules. It answers the question: What happens to cases that already exist when the law starts?

Without transitional rules, many difficult questions can arise. Should old claims follow the old law? Should all cases switch rules on the same day? What if the claim fell due before the law, but the debt collection assignment came after the law? What if the case was in the middle of the process?

§ 34 provides a simple solution. It ties the application of the Act to two points in time: the due date and the time the debt collector receives the assignment.

This is practical because these points in time can often be documented. The due date (forfallsdato) is on the invoice. The time of the assignment can be documented through an agreement or registration with the debt collector.

What does “fall due after the Act enters into force” mean?

A monetary claim falls due when it is to be paid. If the invoice says payment deadline (betalingsfrist) 15 November, the due date is normally 15 November.

If the due date is after the Act entered into force, the Debt Collection Act applies to the collection. For the Debt Collection Act, this means claims that fell due after 1 October 1989.

This was important when the Act was new. An invoice sent in September 1989 but with a due date in October 1989 could fall under the Act. What mattered was not necessarily when the invoice was sent. It was when the claim fell due.

The due date is also important under today's debt collection rules. A debt collection notice (inkassovarsel) under § 9 can only be sent after the claim has fallen due. You should not receive a lawful debt collection notice before the payment deadline has actually passed.

What does “is instructed to collect” mean?

This is about when the debt collector receives the case. A creditor (fordringshaver) may have a claim but not send it to debt collection straight away. If the creditor only gives the debt collector the assignment after the Act entered into force, § 34 says the Act applies to the collection.

This means the Act could also cover older claims, as long as the debt collection assignment came after the start date.

Imagine a claim that fell due before 1 October 1989. If the creditor waited and only sent it to a debt collector after 1 October 1989, the Debt Collection Act was to apply to the collection.

This makes sense. When the debt collector starts work under the new Act, the debt collector should follow the requirements of the new Act. It would have been more complicated if the debt collector had to use old rules just because the invoice was a little older.

Does § 34 apply to ordinary debt collection cases today?

Usually not directly. Most claims today fell due long after 1989. Then there is no real transition between the old rules and the new Debt Collection Act from 1989.

But § 34 can be useful as an example of how transitional rules work. When a new law or a major legal amendment comes, similar questions can arise again. Then you have to read the transitional provisions carefully.

For you as a debtor (skyldner) today, other rules are more important. Have you received a debt collection notice? Was the deadline at least 14 days? Does the demand for payment (betalingsoppfordring) have the correct content? Is the claim disputed? Are the costs lawful?

§ 34 does not normally provide a separate argument in an ordinary 2026 case. It mainly explains how the Act was to be phased in.

What happens if a claim falls outside the transitional rule?

Then you have to look at which rules applied before. Transitional rules decide which set of rules is used.

For the Debt Collection Act, this is largely historical. But the principle is important. When laws change, old cases can sometimes follow old rules, while new cases follow new rules.

That is why you should always look for transitional provisions when laws change. Do not just read the main rule. Also read when it applies from, and which cases it applies to.

If you are reading § 34 because you are looking into an old debt collection case, find three dates.

First, find the due date. That is the date the claim should have been paid.

Then find the date the Act entered into force. For the Debt Collection Act, that was 1 October 1989.

Finally, find the date the debt collector received the assignment. If the assignment came after the Act entered into force, the Act can apply even if the claim fell due earlier.

If your case is an ordinary modern debt collection case, you should instead use § 9, § 10, § 11 and § 17. They more often decide what you have to pay and whether the debt collector has acted correctly.