Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Turun HO 09.07.1976 PÄ-248 AI generated

Court dismissed claim for bridge damage compensation as it falls under local council jurisdiction, not general court authority.

Case Number Turun HO 09.07.1976 PÄ-248
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the plaintiff's claim for compensation regarding damage to a bridge on a public road. The plaintiff argued that the damage occurred during lawful private use of the road, but the opposing party contended that such disputes belong to the local road council. The court ruled that compensation matters for road infrastructure are exclusively within the competence of the local road council and cannot be adjudicated in a general court of law.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Section 1 of the Road Act; Section 1 of the Road Council Act: Disputes over compensation for damage to public roads during lawful private use fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the local road council and are inadmissible in general courts.

Keywords

AI generated
road damage compensation local road council jurisdiction private lawful use inadmissible claim public road infrastructure

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Section 1 of the Road Act
Section 1 of the Road Council Act
AI generated
kko-precedent_1987_7
Supreme Court held general courts have jurisdiction over private road cost claims under the Private Roads Act.
kko-precedent_1994_125
Supreme Court dismisses lower courts' rejection of claim, allowing review of contract formation and damages.
kko-precedent_2003_59
Supreme Court allows contract-based claim for compensation, ruling it does not require expropriation law procedures.
appeal_1981_eastern-finland__248
Court dismissed criminal charges for serious assault but allowed civil damages to be negotiated based on victim's contribution.
kko-precedent_1996_26
Supreme Court allows civil claims in criminal trial even if defendant absent personally but represented by counsel.

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

Yksityistietä luvallisesti käytettäessä tiehen kuuluneelle sillalle oli aiheutettu vahinkoa, jonka korvaamisesta asianosaiset eivät olleet voineet sopia. Korvauskannetta ei voitu asianomaisen kunnan tielautakunnan tutkittaviin asioihin kuuluvana ajaa yleisessä tuomioistuimessa.

Läsnä: Lahtinen - Brunila (apuj.) - Aarola (apuj.) Esittelijä: S. Simola

Lainvoimainen