Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vesiylioikeus 7.2.1994 42/1994 AI generated

Administrative court dismisses appeal as procedural step, not substantive decision, under Finnish Administrative Procedure Act.

Case Number Vesiylioikeus 7.2.1994 42/1994
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Finland dismissed the applicant's appeal regarding the merger of three peat production area permit applications. The court determined that the authority's decision to combine the applications was merely a preparatory administrative act rather than a substantive ruling containing a decision on the merits. Consequently, the court held that the applicant lacked standing to challenge this procedural step, leaving the matter for further preparation.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

HPurkuL 1 §; HPurkuL 2 §: A preparatory administrative act merging permit applications is not a substantive decision and therefore inadmissible for appeal under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Keywords

AI generated
administrative procedure act preparatory administrative act merger of applications admissibility of appeal standing to appeal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
HPurkuL 1 §
HPurkuL 2 §
AI generated
ECLI:FI:KHO:2024:47
Court treats split artificial groundwater permit applications as one project requiring unanimous approval for benefits to count.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2020:24
Supreme Administrative Court allows environmental permit conditions based on application descriptions or regulatory provisions.
admin_2017_vaasa__161
Administrative court dismissed appeal by industrial company claiming standing to challenge neighbor's environmental permit changes.
admin_2003_vaasa__17
Administrative court ruled that a significantly different site constitutes a new project requiring fresh environmental permit approval.
admin_1990_water-superior__183
Administrative court dismissed appeal, affirming tenant's right to object to water diversion permit.

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

VEO:n päätös yhdistää kolmen turvetuotantoalueen lupahakemukset

yhdessä käsiteltäviksi ei ole asiaratkaisua sisältävä kantelukelpoinen

hallintopäätös, vaan asian valmisteluun kuuluva

toimenpide. Luvanhakijan kantelu, jossa vaadittiin hakemusten

erottamista erikseen käsiteltäviksi sillä perusteella, että

hakemusten perusteeton yhdistäminen on menettelyvirhe, joka

vaikuttaa olennaisesti asioissa annettaviin lupapäätöksiin,

jätettiin em. perusteella tutkimatta.

HPurkuL 1 §

HPurkuL 2 §

Lainvoimainen