Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Mikkelin LO 17.12.1991 958 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed appeal by non-resident candidates against election based on gender equality law violation.

Case Number Mikkelin LO 17.12.1991 958
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 appeal filed by two non-resident candidates against a municipal election, ruling that the election was invalid due to a violation of gender equality laws. The candidates argued that the male candidate was discriminating against a more qualified female candidate, while the municipality contested the applicability of the law and the candidates' standing. The court rejected the appeal because the appellants were not residents of the municipality and failed to provide evidence of their eligibility to vote or stand for office.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

KunL 139 §; HLO T:1136/1: An appeal by non-resident candidates regarding a violation of gender equality laws in a municipal election is inadmissible if the appellants cannot prove their status as members of the municipality.

Keywords

AI generated
municipal election gender equality law non-resident candidates administrative appeal municipal membership election validity standing requirement

Cited Legislation

AI generated
KunL 139 §
HLO T:1136/1
HLO T:1136/1, A:22.10.1991
AI generated
kko-precedent_1991_98
City council election for male legal advisor dismissed as discriminatory under gender equality law.
admin_2006_kuopio__94
Administrative court dismissed appointment based on merit, requiring comparison of skills and experience under Constitution Art. 125.2.
admin_1991_hame-county__1136
Voting member without local ties cannot challenge appointment of substitute for another substitute.
kho-precedent_2006_12
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal against planning decision using administrative procedure law exclusion clause.
admin_1993_mikkeli-county__680
Administrative court dismissed appeal where selection criteria were met but justification omitted from decision.

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

Oikeuskysymyksenä oli, onko ulkokuntalaisella viranhakijalla

oikeus valittaa virkavaalista sillä perusteella, että vaalissa

on rikottu naisten ja miesten välisestä tasa-arvosta annettua

lakia.

Miespuolinen viranhakija A ja naispuolinen viranhakija B valittivat

kaupunginvaltuuston suorittamasta vaalista mm. sillä

perusteella, että valitsemalla virkaan miehen kaupunginvaltuusto

on tasa-arvolain vastaisesti syrjinyt huomattavasti

ansioituneempaa naista C, joka valittiin varalle. Kaupunginhallituksen

selityksessä kiistettiin tasa-arvolain vastaisuus

ja lisäksi väitettiin, ettei A:lla ja B:llä ollut oikeutta

vedota tasa-arvolakiin toisen hakijan puolesta.

Lääninoikeus tutki tämän lainvastaisuusperusteeseen perustuvan

vaatimuksen, koska valittajat olivat viranhakijana. Vaali

kumottiin tasa-arvolain vastaisena. Valittajat asuivat

muussa kunnassa eivätkä olleet esittäneet selvitystä siitä,

että olisivat kunnan jäseniä.

KunL 139 §

vrt. HLO T:1136/1, A:22.10.1991