Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vesiylioikeus 12.10.1989 175/1989 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed appeal against bridge removal order based on pre-existing water law compliance.

Case Number Vesiylioikeus 12.10.1989 175/1989
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The applicant requested the removal of a bridge constructed across a lake using a civil servant's application. The court found the bridge was built in accordance with the water law effective at the time of construction, prior to the establishment of the boating lake relationship. Consequently, the administrative court rejected the appeal as the construction did not violate the applicable legal standards.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

VesioikeusL 22 luku 2 § 1; VesioikeusL 1 luku 20 § 2: A structure built before the formal establishment of a boating lake relationship is lawful if it complied with the water law in force at the time of construction.

Keywords

AI generated
administrative appeal water law compliance bridge construction boating lake relationship statutory timeline legal validity removal order

Cited Legislation

AI generated
VesioikeusL 22 luku 2 § 1
VesioikeusL 1 luku 20 § 2 (23.7.1902/31)
VesioikeusL 1 luku 20 § 2 (23.7.1902/31)
AI generated
admin_1990_water-superior__148
Administrative court dismissed appeal against order to remove pier violating water law construction rules.
kho-precedent_2006_91
Supreme Administrative Court allows building permit when site is not on protected water body shore zone.
admin_1990_water-superior__24
Administrative court quashes water authority's dismissal of filling permit, ruling water law applies to subdivision areas.
admin_1991_water-superior__60
Administrative court limits threat to work at applicant's cost to mandatory actions only, excluding optional ones.
admin_1993_water-superior__79
Administrative court dismissed permit request for boat dock due to lack of property rights and disproportionate public harm.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Venevalkamarasitteen haltija vaati virka-apuhakemuksella veneilyliikenteen

venevalkamasta estävän, uoman yli rakennetun

sillan poistamista. Sillan rakentamisen oikeudelliseen arviointiin

oli sovellettava rakentamisen aikana voimassa ollutta

vesioikeuslakia. Koska siltaa, joka oli rakennettu ennen kuin

naapuruussuhde venevalkama-alueen kanssa syntyi, ei ollut rakennettu

tuon lain vastaisesti, virka-apuhakemus hylättiin

vesioikeudessa ja vesiylioikeudessa.

VesiL 22 luku 2 § 1

VesioikeusL 1 luku 20 § 2 (23.7.1902/31)

Lainvoimainen