Finnish court holds that missing witness signature on hunting lease contract does not invalidate the agreement under hunting law.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal regarding a hunting lease contract lacking a second witness signature. The lower court ruled that the missing signature did not render the contract invalid, citing the legislative intent to simplify evidence. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused to grant leave to appeal, upholding the decision that the contract remained valid despite the procedural omission.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedMetsästyslain 6 §:n 1 momentti; A missing witness signature on a hunting lease agreement does not invalidate the contract, as the law simplifies evidence by not requiring strict formalities for such agreements.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedCited Case Law
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedFull text
Metsästyslain 6 §:n 1 momentin määräys, että sopimus metsästysoikeuden vuokraamisesta on todistajain allekirjoitettava, on otettu lakiin todistelun helpottamiseksi. Toisen todistajan nimen puuttuminen sanotunlaisesta sopimuksesta ei tehnyt sopimusta pätemättömäksi.
KKO:n ratkaisu:
Päätös 30.11.1981 n:o 4759: Ei valituslupaa