Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Oulun LO 28.11.1990 957/I AI generated

Administrative court dismissed interest claim against municipality for public law debt exceeding statutory rate.

Case Number Oulun LO 28.11.1990 957/I
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 municipality's claim for additional interest on a student fee reimbursement. The lower authority had accepted the claim but rejected the interest portion, ruling that public law debt relationships do not trigger the interest law and that established practice required only five percent interest. Consequently, the court upheld the rejection of the interest demand based on the lack of statutory applicability and adherence to prior judicial precedent.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

s. 10 of the Interest Law 1950; Public law debt relationships do not attract statutory interest rates, and established judicial practice prevails over new legislation regarding interest calculations on such debts.

Keywords

AI generated
public law debt interest law applicability judicial precedent municipal reimbursement statutory interest rate

Cited Legislation

AI generated
s. 10 of the Interest Law 1950
AI generated
kko-precedent_1988_78
Supreme Court rules public legal aid fees are not public debt interest cases but private debt subject to interest law.
kho-precedent_1999_10
Supreme Administrative Court reduced interest rate on unemployment support refund from 16% to 5% due to lack of specific legal basis.
kho-precedent_2006_22
Student loan interest not deductible from means-tested benefit supplement due to income inclusion during study months.
admin_1990_lapland-county__636
Foreign pension overpayment not deductible as income for Finnish tax purposes; case remitted.
kho-precedent_1997_68
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed recovery of student loan funds as income under social assistance law.

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

Kunta vaati toisen kunnan velvoittamista maksamaan takaisin

määrän, jonka se katsoi maksaneensa liikaa oppilaan koulunkäyntikustannusten

korvauksena, sekä määrälle korkoa 16 prosentin

mukaan siitä päivästä, jona se oli määrän maksanut.

Lääninoikeus, joka hyväksyi saamisvaatimuksen, katsoi korkovaatimuksen

osalta, ettei korkolakia ollut sovellettava julkisoikeudellisesta

perusteesta johtuvaan velkasuhteeseen ja

ettei tuon lain voimaantulo ollut aikaansaanut muutosta niin

sanotun oikeudenkäyntikoron osalta ennen korkolakia vakiintuneeseen

oikeuskäytäntöön, jonka mukaan korkoa oli maksettava

viisi prosenttia hakemuksen vireilletulopäivästä. Vaatimus

koron maksamisesta tuota prosenttimäärää suurempana

ja vireilletulopäivää aikaisemmalta ajalta hylättiin.