Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Turun HAO 25.05.2010 10/0442/2 AI generated

Administrative court dismisses appeal where decision served via interpreter counts as valid service despite applicant's language barriers.

Case Number Turun HAO 25.05.2010 10/0442/2
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Turku dismissed the applicant's appeal regarding the timing of service of an immigration decision. Although the applicant could not read, write, or speak Finnish, the Migration Board sent the decision with proof of receipt, and a police interpreter translated it when the applicant inquired on April 27, 2009. The court ruled that this sequence constituted legal service, meaning the subsequent appeal filed on May 27 was timely and admissible.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Ulkomaalaislaki 190 §; Ulkomaalaislaki 203 § 5 mom: Service of a decision to a foreign national who cannot read the language is valid if effected through an interpreter upon the national's inquiry, thereby establishing the deadline for filing an appeal.

Keywords

AI generated
service of decision foreign national language barrier administrative appeal interpreter service timeliness of appeal proof of receipt

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Ulkomaalaislaki 190 §
Ulkomaalaislaki 203 § 5 mom
Ulkomaalaislaki 203 § 5 mom

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KHO:n päätös 13.9.2011 taltionumero 2580
KHO:n päätös 13.9.2011 taltionumero 2580.
AI generated
admin_2010_vaasa__60
Administrative court allows appeal against water law decision sent before official date.
kho-precedent_2004_75
Supreme Administrative Court quashes decisions for failing to notify a permanent holder of a public office of termination.
kho-precedent_2016_223
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal where first instance court rejected asylum appeal for lack of arguments.
kho-precedent_2007_15
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal regarding objection to appeal ban and admissibility of decision.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2023:46
Supreme Administrative Court allows appeal despite late filing because administrative court decision was not a binding obligation order.

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

Maahanmuuttoviraston päätös oli lähetetty valittajalle tiedoksi saantitodistuksin ja hän oli saantitodistuksen mukaan ottanut lähetyksen vastaan 9.4.2009. Valittaja ei osannut lukea eikä kirjoittaa mitään kieltä eikä puhunut suomea. Valittaja oli 27.4.2009 mennyt poliisilaitokselle tiedustelemaan päätöstä, ja poliisilaitoksen paikalle hankkima tulkki oli tulkannut päätöksen valittajalle. Edellä mainitut seikat huomioon ottaen hallinto-oikeus katsoi valittajan saaneen Maahanmuuttoviraston päätöksen laillisesti tiedokseen vasta 27.4.2009 ja tutki 27.5.2009 vireille tulleen valituksen.

Ulkomaalaislaki 190 §

Ulkomaalaislaki 203 § 5 mom

KHO:n päätös 13.9.2011 taltionumero 2580. Valituslupahakemus hylätään.