Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HO 17.03.1964 AI generated

Husband ordered to pay wife 1962 maintenance overpayment; 1963 claim dismissed due to statute of limitations.

Case Number Vaasan HO 17.03.1964
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The wife sued her husband for maintenance overpayments under the Marriage Act, claiming 4,000 marks for the period between January 1, 1962, and August 31, 1963. The lower court dismissed the entire claim, but the Court of Appeal ruled that the wife was barred from claiming overpayments for 1963 due to the one-year limitation period. Consequently, the court ordered the husband to pay the 1962 overpayment while dismissing the 1963 portion of the suit.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Marriage Act s. 50; The wife's right to claim maintenance overpayments is subject to a one-year limitation period, barring claims for the current year while allowing recovery for prior years.

Keywords

AI generated
Marriage Act s. 50 maintenance overpayment statute of limitations family law claim one-year period

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Marriage Act s. 50
AI generated
appeal_1986_helsinki__2524
Court awarded 16% interest on 1982 damages claims as they were not delayed under the Interest Act.
appeal_1984_eastern-finland__2394
Appeal court allows state compensation for litigation costs when increasing damages in civil proceedings.
admin_1991_water-superior__189
Administrative court dismissed water supply damage claims as barred by general ten-year limitation period.
kko-other_1997_4330
Supreme Court dismissed late damages claim under Employment Contracts Act and set interest start date.
kko-other_2006_720
Supreme Court dismissed client's claim for increased damages due to changed trial circumstances without prior appeal.

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

Vaimo vaati alioikeudessa avioliittolain 50 §:n nojalla miehen velvoittamista suorittamaan vaimolle korvaukseksi menoista, joita tällä oli 1.1.1962 ja 31.8.1963 välisenä aikana ollut perheen elatukseen yli sen, mitä vaimo oli ollut velvollinen suorittamaan, 200 markkaa kuukaudelta eli yhteensä 4.000 markkaa.

Alioikeus hylkäsi vaatimuksen.

Koska vaimolla avioliittolain 50 §:n nojalla ei ole oikeutta vuoden 1963 kuluessa hakea korvausta liikamenoista samalta vuodelta, hovioikeus hylkäsi tältä osin kanteen ja velvoitti miehen maksamaan vuoden 1962 ajalta.

Lainvoimainen