Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HAO 08.07.2011 11/0195/1 AI generated

Administrative court revoked local authority's decision and transferred shooting range permit case to regional authority due to cross-border noise impact.

Case Number Vaasan HAO 08.07.2011 11/0195/1
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Finland revoked the local environmental authority's decision to amend the environmental permit for a shooting range located near a county border. The plaintiff argued that significant noise pollution extended beyond the municipality, necessitating review by the regional authority under specific environmental regulations. The court agreed, ruling that when environmental impacts affect a substantial area outside the site municipality, the regional authority must decide the permit application contrary to the standard rule.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Ympäristönsuojeluasetus 7 § 1 mom 14 a-kohta; Ympäristönsuojelulaki 31 § 1 mom 2 kohta: When environmental impacts of an outdoor shooting range extend significantly beyond the site municipality, the regional authority, not the local authority, decides the environmental permit application.

Keywords

AI generated
outdoor shooting range environmental permit noise pollution cross-border impact regional authority administrative jurisdiction environmental protection act

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Ympäristönsuojeluasetus 7 § 1 mom 14 a-kohta
Ympäristönsuojeluasetus 7 § 1 mom 14 a-kohta
Ympäristönsuojelulaki 31 § 1 mom 2 kohta
Ympäristönsuojelulaki 31 § 1 mom 2 kohta (22.12.2009/1590)

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KHO:2014:75
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal; shooting range permit belongs to municipal authority, not regional agency.
AI generated
kho-precedent_2014_75
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal; shooting range permit belongs to municipal authority, not regional agency.
admin_2013_vaasa__173
Court dismissed appeal; shooting range permit stays with municipal board despite cross-border impact.
admin_2018_vaasa__164
Administrative court dismissed appeal against environmental permit for burning dead animals, upholding local authority's decision.
kho-other_2015_3196
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal against environmental permit regarding quarrying and water discharge rules.
admin_2017_vaasa__182
Administrative court dismissed local authority's jurisdiction over water discharge permit, transferring case to regional authority.

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

Ampumarata sijaitsi naapurikunnan rajan tuntumassa siten, että meluhaitta ei rajoittunut pelkästään toiminnan sijaintikunnan alueelle. Ympäristönsuojeluasetuksen 7 §:n 1 momentin 14 a-kohdan mukaan ulkona sijaitsevan ampumaradan ympäristöluvan käsittelee kunnan ympäristönsuojeluviranomainen. Kun toiminnan ympäristövaikutukset saattavat kohdistua huomattavassa määrin sijaintikuntaa laajemmalle alueelle, ulkona sijaitsevan ampumaradan ympäristölupahakemuksen ratkaisee poiketen mitä toimivaltaisesta viranomaisesta säädetään ympäristönsuojeluasetuksessa aluehallintovirasto. Hallinto-oikeus kumosi kunnan ympäristönsuojeluviranomaisen ympäristöluvan tarkistamista ja olennaista muuttamista koskevassa asiassa tekemän päätöksen ja siirsi asian aluehallintoviraston käsiteltäväksi.

Ympäristönsuojelulaki 31 § 1 mom 2 kohta (22.12.2009/1590)

Ympäristönsuojeluasetus 7 § 1 mom 14 a-kohta

Vrt. KHO:2014:75