Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Kuopion HAO 23.11.2010 10/0539/3 AI generated

Administrative court dismisses parent's claim for costs of substitute teaching when school did not refuse instruction.

Case Number Kuopion HAO 23.11.2010 10/0539/3
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 parent's appeal against the Regional Administrative Agency's decision regarding substitute teaching costs. The parent argued for compensation based on a general review of teaching quality during teacher layoffs, but the court found the agency's report insufficient to support this claim. Since the municipality had not refused to provide education and the child's schooling was arranged voluntarily at home, the court ruled the municipality was not liable for the parent's expenses.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Hallintolainkäyttölaki 69 §; Perusopetuslaki 4 §, 26 §: A municipality is not obligated to compensate a parent for costs incurred in arranging substitute teaching if the municipality did not refuse to provide education and the arrangement was initiated by the parent.

Keywords

AI generated
municipal liability substitute teaching costs parental initiative administrative appeal compensation claim education provision teacher layoff

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Hallintolainkäyttölaki 69 §
Hallintolainkäyttölaki 69 §
Perusopetuslaki 4 §
Perusopetuslaki 26 §
AI generated
kko-precedent_2001_93
Supreme Court allows damages for municipality's failure to provide daycare under specific statutory duty.
kho-precedent_2002_63
Supreme Court dismisses appeal because university hiring decision lacks administrative reviewability under higher education law.
kko-precedent_1997_64
Supreme Court held child custody cases do not allow cost shifting unless specific reasons exist, unlike alimony disputes.
kko-precedent_2008_43
Supreme Court dismisses claim against state for same damages as prior dismissed case against university.
kko-precedent_1991_20
Supreme Court allows apprentice's claim for severance pay and damages after unlawful contract termination.

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

Kunta ei ollut velvollinen korvaamaan vanhemmalle aiheutuneita kustannuksia siitä, että hän oli järjestänyt korvaavaa opetusta lapselleen opettajan ollessa lomautettuna.

Lapsen vanhempi vetosi aluehallintoviraston tekemään selvitykseen, jossa oli tarkasteltu opetuksen laatua yleisellä tasolla lomautusten aikana. Hallinto-oikeus katsoi, että hallintoriita-asiaa ei voitu ratkaista mainitun selvityksen perusteella vanhemman eduksi. Koska kunta ei ollut kieltäytynyt opetuksen järjestämisestä ja lapsen opetus oli järjestetty vanhemman omasta aloitteesta kotona, ei kunta ollut velvollinen korvaamaan opetuksen järjestämisestä vanhemmalle aiheutuneita kustannuksia.

Hallintolainkäyttölaki 69 §

Perusopetuslaki 4 §

Perusopetuslaki 26 §

Päätös on lainvoimainen