Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Kouvolan HO 31.01.1979 TU-33/78 AI generated

Court orders buyer to pay agreed price when prior notice of non-payment was given.

Case Number Kouvolan HO 31.01.1979 TU-33/78
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court of appeal ordered the buyer to pay the agreed contract price despite their prior notice of non-payment. The buyer had explicitly informed the seller they would not pay, yet the court found no valid ground for refusal. Consequently, the court ruled that the buyer remained legally bound to fulfill the payment obligation under the contract.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Laki 1974/100, 1 luku, 10 a; 1 luku, 10 b: When a buyer explicitly notifies the seller of non-payment prior to delivery, the court may still order payment if the refusal lacks legal basis, establishing that prior notice does not automatically exempt the buyer from contractual obligations.

Keywords

AI generated
contractual obligation buyer liability prior notice payment refusal court order contractual breach financial liability

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Laki 1974/100, 1 luku, 10 a
Laki 1974/100, 1 luku, 10 b
AI generated
appeal_1979_vaasa__772
Claim for lost business profit dismissed where buyer failed to demand performance within reasonable time.
market_2000_7
Consumer Protection Court banned misleading 'extended warranty' ads and charging fees for repairs under mandatory warranty rules.
kko-precedent_2012_1
Supreme Court dismisses claim that seller's soil remediation obligation is binding when survey was fundamentally wrong.
appeal_1981_eastern-finland__504
Court of Appeal dismissed shareholder derivative suit; Supreme Court upheld decision on standing and procedural requirements.
appeal_1975_vaasa__103
Court rules horse trade price must include agreed stud fee value calculated at average market rate at performance deadline.

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

Kun ostaja oli etukäteen ilmoittanut, ettei tule maksamaan toimitettavaksi sovittua tavaraa, hovioikeus, kun kieltäytymiselle ei ollut perustetta, velvoitti ostajan suorittamaan sovitun kauppahinnan sitä vastaan, että tavara toimitettiin sopimuksen mukaisesti ostajalle.

Lainvoimainen