Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vesiylioikeus 21.4.1995 72/1995 AI generated

Court dismisses permit violation claim for fuel dock, ruling safety compliance irrelevant to water law removal order.

Case Number Vesiylioikeus 21.4.1995 72/1995
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 owner's request to remove a dock structure built without a permit. Although the dock served as a fuel distribution point and posed risks to water quality, the court held that compliance with safety regulations was irrelevant to the water law violation. Consequently, the claim for removal was rejected, and the owner's request for oral proceedings was also denied.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

VesiL 1 luku 15 §; VesiL 1 luku 19 §: A structure built without a permit must be removed regardless of whether it meets safety standards, as safety compliance does not negate the violation of water law provisions.

Keywords

AI generated
unpermitted structure removal water quality risk safety regulation compliance administrative court review fuel distribution facility

Cited Legislation

AI generated
VesiL 1 luku 15 §
VesiL 1 luku 19 §
VesiL 2 luku 2 § 1 mom
VesiL 21 luku 3 §
AI generated
kho-other_2016_2010
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal against water authority's rejection of flood damage compensation claim. Damages not covered by Water Act as caused by natural events, not regulation violations.
admin_1990_water-superior__148
Administrative court dismissed appeal against order to remove pier violating water law construction rules.
admin_1990_central-finland-county__1044
Storage shed deemed new construction requiring permit; building committee failed to act; appeal remanded for permit issuance.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2021:166
Summer kitchen deemed a building requiring action permit; denied due to neighbor proximity and nuisance.
admin_2003_vaasa__232
Administrative court reduced a pier removal order to a shortened length, finding no significant environmental impact. The court ruled that minor pier use did not constitute a harmful change under water law. Natura 2000 restrictions were absent without specific protective decisions. The pier was shortened to meet swimming and access needs. The terrace removal order remained unchanged. This decision balances environmental protection with practical user requirements.

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

Rannan suuntaisesti pengertämällä ja betonilla vahvistamalla

rakennettu siisti laiturirakennelma, jota käytettiin myös veneiden

polttoainejakeluasemana, oli luvanvarainen siitä naapurikiinteistölle

aiheutuvan haitan ja vesistön veden laadulle

aiheutuvan riskin vuoksi (VEO=VYO).

Sillä seikalla, täyttivätkö jakeluasema ja laiturin sähköasennukset

asianmukaiset turvallisuusmääräykset, ei ollut merkitystä

ratkaistaessa kysymystä rakennelmien vesilain mukaisesta

luvanvaraisuudesta ja vaatimusta niiden poistamisesta. Laiturin

omistajien vaatimus suullisen käsittelyn toimittamisesta

VYO:ssa todistajien kuulemiseksi näistä seikoista hylättiin.

VesiL 1 luku 15 §

VesiL 1 luku 19 §

VesiL 2 luku 2 § 1 mom

VesiL 21 luku 3 §

Lainvoimainen