Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Helsingin HAO 18.5.2001 01/0432/7 AI generated

Late delivery of customs debt notice after three-year period dismissed appeal for inadmissibility.

Case Number Helsingin HAO 18.5.2001 01/0432/7
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 because the customs debt notice was delivered to the debtor after the three-year limitation period expired. The debtor argued that the late notification rendered the decision procedurally invalid, while the authorities maintained the statute of limitations had already run. The court ruled that the delay in service did not cure the fundamental defect of exceeding the statutory time limit for notification.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Tullikoodeksi (ETY) N:o 2913/92 221 artikla 3 kohta; Laki tiedoksiannosta hallintoasioissa 8 § ja 22 §: The failure to notify a customs debt within the prescribed three-year period renders the notification invalid, and such a defect cannot be cured by subsequent service.

Keywords

AI generated
customs debt notification three-year limitation period late administrative service procedural invalidity customs code article 221

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Tullikoodeksi (ETY) N:o 2913/92 221 artikla 3 kohta
Tullikoodeksi (ETY) N:o 2913/92 221 artikla 3 kohta
Laki tiedoksiannosta hallintoasioissa 8 §
Laki tiedoksiannosta hallintoasioissa 8 §
Laki tiedoksiannosta hallintoasioissa 22 §
Laki tiedoksiannosta hallintoasioissa 22 §

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KHO:n päätös 12.11.2003 taltionumero 2779
KHO:n päätös 12.11.2003 taltionumero 2779.
AI generated
kho-precedent_2010_51
Court dismisses appeal allowing customs duty refund based on prior sales price despite administrative error.
admin_2017_eastern-finland__296
Administrative court dismissed penalty due to expired three-year statute of limitations for vehicle tax violation.
kho-precedent_2014_100
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal as late; postal tracking data serves as proof of service date under administrative procedure law.
insurance_2004_8385-2002
Insurance court allows late appeal dismissal due to special weight of foreign service delay.
kko-other_2018_2
Supreme Court dismisses appeal where lower court failed to examine a new plaintiff's complaint after setting a new deadline.

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

Säännösten vastainen maahantuonti oli tapahtunut 1.9.1996,

jolloin tullivelka oli syntynyt. Jälkikantopäätös oli vahvistettu

ja postitettu 27.8.1999. Tullivelallinen oli saanut

tiedon päätöksestä 2.9.1999. Tullien määrän tiedoksianto

velalliselle oli siten toimitettu tullikoodeksin 221

artiklan 3 kohdassa tarkoitetun kolmen vuoden määräajan

päätyttyä eli liian myöhään.

Tullikoodeksi (ETY) N:o 2913/92 221 artikla 3 kohta

Laki tiedoksiannosta hallintoasioissa 8 §

Laki tiedoksiannosta hallintoasioissa 22 §

KHO:n päätös 12.11.2003 taltionumero 2779. Ei muutoksenhakulupaa.