Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vesiylioikeus 18.5.1989 82/1989 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed water damage claim as statute of limitations expired due to canal construction.

Case Number Vesiylioikeus 18.5.1989 82/1989
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 plaintiff's claim for damages and remedial actions regarding water pollution caused by a canal construction. The plaintiff argued that the pollution resulted from unforeseen sediment collapse, but the court found the claim time-barred. Since the harmful effects occurred less than ten years before the claim was filed, the court ruled the claim did not meet the statutory limitation period requirements.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

VesiL 2 luku 27 § 2 mom; A claim for damages or remedial measures is time-barred if the harmful effects occurred more than ten years before the claim is filed.

Keywords

AI generated
statute of limitations water pollution canal construction environmental damage administrative court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
VesiL 2 luku 27 § 2 mom
AI generated
admin_1993_water-superior__49
Administrative court dismissed appeal due to procedural defect regarding unaddressed rental income loss claim.
admin_1990_water-superior__171
Administrative court dismissed appeal against water authority's permit for fish hatchery drainage ditch and dam construction.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2019:52
Supreme Court dismisses business ban request for environmental offender where no specific environmental damage was proven.
kho-other_2017_4566
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal regarding road advertising permit denial based on missing photos for statutory discretion.
kko-other_2024_847
Supreme Court held that defendants committed the lesser offense of environmental damage rather than the more serious environmental crime.

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

VYO katsoi, että Kimolanlahden mataloituminen ja lahden pohjakasvillisuuden

nopeutunut rehevöityminen olivat asiassa esitetyn

selvityksen mukaan johtuneet kanavan rakenteiden ja läjitysalueelle

kootun pohjalietteen ennalta arvaamattomasta sortumisesta.

Kun vahingolliset seuraukset olivat syntyneet vähemmän

kuin 10 vuotta ennen vaatimuksen kohdistamista luvansaajaan,

vahingonkärsijän korvaus- ja toimenpidevaatimukset

eivät vesilain 2 luvun 27 §:n 2 momentin viimeisen virkkeen

mukaan olleet vanhentuneet.

VesiL 2 luku 27 § 2 mom

Lainvoimainen