Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vesiylioikeus 27.9.1990 154/1990 AI generated

Finnish court held that fish passage installation is not fishing under the Fishing Act.

Case Number Vesiylioikeus 27.9.1990 154/1990
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court dismissed the applicant's request to revoke the permit for installing a fish passage from a lake to a stream. The applicant argued this activity constituted fishing under Section 27 of the Fishing Act, but the court found it was merely a water management measure. Consequently, the court ruled that the activity did not fall within the scope of the Fishing Act, leaving the permit valid.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Kalastuslaki 27 §; The installation of a fish passage from a lake to a stream is not considered fishing or fishery management under Section 27 of the Fishing Act.

Keywords

AI generated
Fishing Act Section 27 fish passage installation water management measure administrative permit validity fishing definition scope

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Fishing Act Section 27
Water Act Chapter 6 Section 2
AI generated
ECLI:FI:KKO:2022:26
Supreme Court dismisses fishing charge against Sami locals due to constitutional conflict with fishing regulations.
kho-other_2015_771
Supreme Administrative Court allows appeal against environmental permit, requiring monitoring plan updates for peak flow conditions.
admin_1998_uusimaa-county__485
VAT deduction denied for fish seed purchase as it was not for taxable business activity.
kho-precedent_2012_52
Supreme Administrative Court allows appeal regarding modification of fishing obligation on fishing area under Water Act.
appeal_1981_eastern-finland__1786
Court dismisses appeal against fishing ban ruling, upholding confiscation of illegal gear.

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

Lohikalojen ongintalammikon perustamista ei pidetty kalastuslain

27 §:ssä tarkoitettuna kalastuksena tai kalakannnan hoitona.

Kalankulkuesteen asettaminen lammesta muuhun vesistöön

johtavaan puroon katsottiin järven sulkemiseksi. VEO:n päätöksestä,

jolla hakijalle oli mainitun säännöksen ja vesilain 2

luvun 6 §:n 2 momentin nojalla myönnetty lupa kalankulkuesteen

asettamiseen puroon em. tarkoituksessa, poistettiin kalastuslain

säännös.

KalastusL 27 §

Lainvoimainen