Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Helsingin HO 19.02.1986 92 AI generated

Apartment association fee decision based on floor area upheld despite differing usage and quality.

Case Number Helsingin HO 19.02.1986 92
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court upheld the apartment association's resolution to set fees based on floor area, rejecting the shareholders' claim for differentiated rates. Shareholders argued that usage patterns and building quality necessitated varying fees, but the company's bylaws only specified floor area as the basis. The court ruled that without explicit bylaw provisions allowing differentiation, the uniform floor-area calculation was legally valid.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Section 10 of the Act on the Management of Apartment Buildings; The court established that where the bylaws specify floor area as the sole basis for fees, the association may not unilaterally introduce differentiated rates based on usage or quality absent specific statutory or contractual authorization.

Keywords

AI generated
apartment association fee calculation floor area basis shareholder resolution bylaw interpretation uniform fees differentiated charges

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Section 10 of the Act on the Management of Apartment Buildings

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KKO:1967-II-101
AI generated
kko-other_2020_1567
Supreme Court dismissed appeal regarding apartment company resolution invalidity affecting continued residence permit conditions.
kko-precedent_1998_19
Supreme Court allows reduction of attic room fees to match base fees due to changed financial circumstances.
appeal_1985_turku__527
Shareholder's appeal dismissed for waiving invalidity grounds by voting for interest rate increase in shareholders' meeting.
kko-precedent_2005_22
Supreme Court allows appeal against summary dismissal of challenge to apartment company repair fee allocation under general clause.
kko-precedent_1989_36
Supreme Court dismisses appeal to void cable TV connection resolution without unanimous shareholder consent. Connection did not deviate significantly from standard and costs were fairly shared.

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

Asunto-osakeyhtiön yhtiökokouksessa oli päätetty osakkaiden hallitsemistaan huoneistoista maksettavaksi vastikkeeksi asuinhuoneistoista 9,00 ja autotalleista 4,50 mk neliömetriltä.

Yhtiöjärjestyksen mukaan vastikeperuste oli huoneistojen lattiapinta-ala. Yhtiökokouksen päätös, jota kaikki osakkaat eivät olleet kannattaneet, kumottiin, koska yhtiöjärjestyksessä ei ollut määräystä siitä, että vastikkeet olisi määrättävä eri suuruisiksi huoneistojen käyttötavan ja laadun perusteella.

KKO:1967-II-101

Läsnä: Surakka, Liukko (erim.) ja Tornivuori Esittelijä: Jakonen

Lainvoimainen