Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HO 04.04.1967 AI generated

Court dismisses alternative divorce ground when primary ground is already rejected and not examined.

Case Number Vaasan HO 04.04.1967
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court of appeal dismissed the plaintiff's alternative request for divorce based on separate living after the initial request based on cohabitation was rejected. The plaintiff had amended their appeal to include this new ground, but the lower court had not examined it. The court ruled that since the primary ground was already rejected, the alternative ground could not be considered as a new issue.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Eri perusteiden nojalla harkittava avioero: jos yksi peruste on hylätty, ei toista perustetta voida harkita uudeksi kysymykseksi; Eri perusteiden nojalla harkittava avioero: jos yksi peruste on hylätty, ei toista perustetta voida harkita uudeksi kysymykseksi.

Keywords

AI generated
divorce grounds alternative request procedural dismissal cohabitation separate living appeal amendment court of appeal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Eri perusteiden nojalla harkittava avioero: jos yksi peruste on hylätty, ei toista perustetta voida harkita uudeksi kysymykseksi

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KKO:n ratkaisu: Tuomio n:o 1578/12.6.1968
AI generated
appeal_1968_vaasa__x295
Appeal court remands case for inquiry into legal standing and grounds of claim under Civil Procedure Code.
appeal_1981_rovaniemi__261
Court of Appeal granted free legal aid and a lawyer to a spouse who withdrew their divorce lawsuit.
appeal_1984_helsinki__905
Divorce granted despite prior cohabitation; wife's adultery waived by husband's long knowledge.
appeal_1980_turku__2524
Court of Appeal grants free legal aid and counsel to a divorce plaintiff whose appeal was previously dismissed.
appeal_1972_vaasa__299
Court remands divorce case to lower court for proper handling of cohabitation claim after initial dismissal.

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

A oli alioikeudessa vaatinut avioeroa B:stä huoruuden perusteella.

Alioikeuden hylättyä kanteen A muutoksenhakemuksessaan uudisti kanteensa ja vaihtoehtoisesti vaati avioeroa myös erillään asumisen perusteella.

Hovioikeus jätti viimeksi mainitun vaatimuksen vasta hovioikeudessa tehtynä tutkimatta. (Ään.)

Eri mieltä oleva jäsen tutki vaatimuksen oikeudenkäymiskaaren 14 luvun 2 §:n 3 momentin nojalla.

KKO:n ratkaisu:

Tuomio n:o 1578/12.6.1968: ei kysymys enää uudesta eroperus- teesta.