Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vesiylioikeus 22.2.1989 30/1989 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed appeal against water authority's order to obtain permit for boat dock exceeding boundary.

Case Number Vesiylioikeus 22.2.1989 30/1989
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The administrative court dismissed the applicant's appeal against the water authority's decision requiring a permit for a boat dock extending beyond the property boundary. The authority determined that constructing the dock 30 meters long would cause legal consequences under the Water Act, necessitating a permit application within two months. The court upheld the authority's interpretation that the permit requirement applies when structures exceed the intended boundary line, rejecting the applicant's claim that a shorter dock would suffice.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Water Act Chapter 1 Section 15; Water Act Chapter 2 Section 2: A structure extending beyond the property boundary into a water area requires a permit if it may cause legal consequences under the Water Act, regardless of the structure's intended length.

Keywords

AI generated
water area structures property boundary extension permit requirement Water Act Chapter 1 administrative appeal boat dock construction legal consequences

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Water Act Chapter 1 Section 15
Water Act Chapter 1 Section 28
Water Act Chapter 2 Section 2
Water Act Chapter 21 Section 3 Paragraph 1

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KHO decision T:3601, A:6.9.1979
KHO decision T:91, A:19.2.1981
VYO decision T:29/1989, A:21.2.1989
AI generated
admin_2000_hameenlinna__231
Administrative court dismissed appeal against building permit denial due to excessive harm to neighbor's holiday home use.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2021:166
Summer kitchen deemed a building requiring action permit; denied due to neighbor proximity and nuisance.
admin_1994_water-superior__202
Court allows partial extension of permit deadline by ruling work substantially commenced prevents permit lapse.
admin_1989_water-superior__29
Administrative court dismissed city's refusal of boat pier permit due to lack of neighbor notification.
admin_1986_turku-and-pori-county__790
Administrative court dismissed neighbor's appeal for temporary construction permit due to lack of zoning plan.

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

Noin 60 m:n pituiseksi aiottu, yksityistä tarvetta varten rakennettava

kiinteä venelaituri olisi vesialueella ulottunut 30

m:n matkalta ja enimmillään 10 m:n leveydeltä tilarajan ajatellun

jatkeen yli naapuritilan edustalle. Koska tällaisesta

laiturista saattoi aiheutua naapuritilalle vesilain 1 luvun 15

§:ssä tarkoitettuja seurauksia, VEO oli naapurin vaatimuksesta

velvoittanut rakentajan tekemään jo aloitetusta laiturin rakentamisesta

lupahakemuksen vesioikeudelle vesilain 16 luvun 1

§:ssä tarkoitetuin tavoin ja selvityksin 2 kk:n kuluessa päätöksen

lainvoimaiseksi tulosta uhalla, että naapuritilan edustajalle

ulottuvat rakenteet voitiin viranomaisen tai haitankärsijän

vaatimuksesta heti määrätä purettaviksi rakentajan

kustannuksella. Lupahakemus ei ollut tarpeen, mikäli laituria

ei rakennettu noin 30 metriä pidemmäksi eli enintään tilojen

rajalinjan ajatellulle jatkeelle saakka. Laiturin rakentajan

haettua muutosta VYO ei muuttanut VEO:n päätöstä.

VesiL 1 luku 15 §

VesiL 1 luku 28 §

VesiL 2 luku 2 §

VesiL 21 luku 3 § 1 mom

KHO:n päätös T:3601, A:6.9.1979

KHO:n päätös T:91, A:19.2.1981

VYO:n päätös T:29/1989, A:21.2.1989

Lainvoimainen