Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Uudenmaan LO 13.7.1995 979/2 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed social services officer's decision on child custody due to lack of authority.

Case Number Uudenmaan LO 13.7.1995 979/2
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Uusimaa rejected the decision by a social services officer regarding the placement of a child into custody. The officer had acted without authority because the parents opposed the placement, making it a form of involuntary guardianship. The court held that under the Social Services Act, such decision-making power cannot be delegated from the multi-member body to a single officer.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Sosiaalihuoltolaki 6 § 1 momentti; sosiaalihuoltolaki 12 § 1 momentti; Lastensuojelulaki 16 §: When a child's placement into custody is contested by parents, the decision-making authority under the Social Services Act cannot be delegated to a single officer by a multi-member body.

Keywords

AI generated
social services officer authority child custody placement involuntary guardianship decision delegation limitation parental opposition rights

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Sosiaalihuoltolaki 6 § 1 momentti
Sosiaalihuoltolaki 12 § 1 momentti
Lastensuojelulaki 16 §
Lastensuojelulaki 17 §
AI generated
admin_2003_helsinki__767
Administrative court upheld child custody decision but rejected retroactive application due to lack of jurisdiction over pre-ruling period.
admin_2011_helsinki__318
Administrative court ruled social services lacked authority to decide on child custody without a formal application.
admin_1997_uusimaa-county__109
Administrative court dismissed child custody removal as parents' disagreement did not endanger child's health or development.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2025:88
Supreme Administrative Court allows temporary home placement for child during custody despite lack of specific grounds.
admin_1989_vaasa-county__3227
Administrative court dismissed appeal because county council failed to submit child custody decision to district court for approval.

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

Perusturvalautakunnan alainen viranhaltija ei ollut toimivaltainen

päättämään lastensuojelulain 16 §:n nojalla lapsen

huostaanotosta, kun lapsen vanhemmat olivat vastustaneet

huostaanottoa. Lääninoikeus katsoi, että kysymys oli sellaisesta

henkilölle annettavasta tahdonvastaisesta huollosta,

jota koskevaa päätösvaltaa ei sosiaalihuoltolain 12 §:n

1 momentin nojalla voitu siirtää monijäseniseltä toimielimeltä

viranhaltijalle. Lääninoikeus ei vahvistanut viranhaltijan

päätöstä.

SosiaalihuoltoL 6 § 1 mom

SosiaalihuoltoL 12 § 1 mom

LastensuojeluL 16 §

LastensuojeluL 17 §