Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Kuopion HAO 29.8.2001 01/0582/2 AI generated

Administrative court dismissed appeal for late submission of grounds after extension deadline expired.

Case Number Kuopion HAO 29.8.2001 01/0582/2
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 appellant failed to submit the required grounds for the municipal appeal before the statutory deadline expired. Although the court requested an extension under the Administrative Procedure Act, the appellant provided these grounds after the original deadline had passed. The court ruled that the extension request did not extend the time limit for submitting the substantive grounds of the appeal.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Hallintolainkäyttölain 28 §; Kuntalain 90 § 3 mom. The extension procedure under the Administrative Procedure Act does not extend the time limit for submitting the grounds of a municipal appeal if those grounds are presented after the deadline has expired.

Keywords

AI generated
administrative procedure act municipal appeal extension procedure submission deadline grounds of appeal time limit expiry administrative court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Hallintolainkäyttölain 28 §
Jatkaako hallinto-oikeuden hallintolainkäyttölain 28 §:n
Kuntalain 90 § 3 mom.
AI generated
kho-precedent_2016_223
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal where first instance court rejected asylum appeal for lack of arguments.
kko-other_2016_2061
Supreme Court dismisses appeal due to withdrawal and death of second appellant, halting proceedings.
admin_1985_central-finland-county__261
Administrative court dismissed appeal for late filing; plaintiff submitted original decision late and completed appeal after deadline expired.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2023:46
Supreme Administrative Court allows appeal despite late filing because administrative court decision was not a binding obligation order.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2020:134
Supreme Administrative Court reverses lower court for dismissing appeal without review due to procedural error.

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

Jatkaako hallinto-oikeuden hallintolainkäyttölain 28 §:n

mukainen täydennysmenettely kunnallisvalituksen valitusaikaa?

A toimitti valitusajan kuluessa kunnallisvalituksen, jossa

hän ilmoitti ainoastaan olevansa tyytymätön teknisen lautakunnan

päätökseen ja toimittavansa perustelut myöhemmin. Hallinto-oikeus

pyysi hallintolainkäyttölain 28 §:n mukaisesti

A:ta täydentämään valitustaan. A täydensi valitustaan täydennyksen

toimittamiselle varatun määräajan kuluessa, mutta kunnallisvalitukselle

varatun määräajan jälkeen.

Hallinto-oikeus jätti valituksen tutkimatta, koska A ei ollut

kuntalain 90 §:n 3 momentin mukaisesti esittänyt valituksensa

perusteita ennen valitusajan päättymistä. Hallinto-oikeuden

antaman täydennyskehotus ei jatkanut kunnallisvalituksen vali-

tusaikaa.

HallintolainkäyttöL 28 §

KuntaL 90 § 3 mom.