Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vesiylioikeus 6.4.1990 53/1990 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed claim for compensation under Water Act when no water right permit was required.

Case Number Vesiylioikeus 6.4.1990 53/1990
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 claim for compensation for damages caused by a drainage ditch in the marine area. The plaintiff argued for liability under the Water Act, while the defendant contended that no water right permit was necessary for the ditch construction. The court ruled that the Water Act applies to such compensation only when a water right permit was not required for the drainage work.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

VesiL 1 luku 3 §; VesiL 6 luku 2 § 1 mom; VesiL 6 luku 6 § 1 mom; VesiL 11 luku 8 § 4 mom: Compensation for damages caused by drainage works in the marine area is governed by the Water Act only when a water right permit was not required for the construction.

Keywords

AI generated
Water Act compensation drainage ditch liability marine area damages water right permit administrative court review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
VesiL 1 luku 3 §
VesiL 6 luku 2 § 1 mom
VesiL 6 luku 6 § 1 mom
VesiL 11 luku 8 § 4 mom

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KHO:1978-A-II-128
Vihervuori: Vesistön järjestelyn ja ojituksen oikeuskysymykset s. 59
AI generated
kko-precedent_1993_80
Municipality liable for frost damage when causation is probable but burden of proof remains on defendant.
kho-other_2014_3344
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal regarding compensation for waterway construction affecting property value and landscape. Appeal rejected due to lack of grounds to alter lower court decision. Court upheld original compensation calculation and denied legal costs. Appeal dismissed. Appeal rejected due to lack of grounds to alter lower court decision. Court upheld original compensation calculation and denied legal costs.
kho-other_2015_3151
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal and allowed company to avoid paying litigation costs as non-public authority.
kho-other_2016_672
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal against environmental permit conditions for shooting range noise limits.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2025:85
Supreme Administrative Court allows permit; significant environmental impacts not found for preliminary coastal construction project.

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

Ojituksen merialueella aiheuttamien vahinkojen korvaamiseen

sovellettiin vesilakia. Ympäristönsuojelulautakunta oli oikeutettu

tutkimaan nämä vahingot silloin, kun ojitukseen ei tarvittu

vesioikeuden lupaa.

VesiL 1 luku 3 §

VesiL 6 luku 2 § 1 mom

VesiL 6 luku 6 § 1 mom

VesiL 11 luku 8 § 4 mom

KHO:1978-A-II-128

Vihervuori: Vesistön järjestelyn ja ojituksen oikeuskysymykset

s. 59

Lainvoimainen