Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Rovaniemen HO 21.08.1986 871/86 AI generated

Court dismisses speeding charge for exceeding limit by 50 km/h, allowing only lesser offense of endangering traffic.

Case Number Rovaniemen HO 21.08.1986 871/86
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Appeal dismissed the charge of endangering traffic and the separate traffic offense, reducing the conviction to the lesser crime of endangering traffic. The defendant drove at 130 km/h in a 100 km/h zone, while the lower court had found this conduct dangerous enough for a heavier penalty. The appellate court determined that the excessive speed constituted only the specific offense of endangering traffic, not the broader crime of endangering traffic.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Laki liikenteen turvallisuuden varmistamisesta (1994:1050); 11 §:n 1 momentti: The court held that driving at 130 km/h in a 100 km/h zone constitutes the offense of endangering traffic but not the separate crime of endangering traffic.

Keywords

AI generated
speeding offense endangering traffic traffic safety law criminal liability speed limit violation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Laki liikenteen turvallisuuden varmistamisesta (1994:1050)
AI generated
kko-precedent_2004_14
Supreme Court extends driver ban to three months and rejects conditional ban due to extreme speed danger.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2025:32
Supreme Court of Finland upholds gross endangerment of traffic safety conviction for 146 km/h speeding despite good conditions.
kko-precedent_1991_29
Supreme Court of Finland allows gross traffic endangerment charge and driving ban for 190 km/h highway speeding.
kko-precedent_1991_80
Supreme Court reverses acquittal on gross endangerment of traffic due to extreme speeding with other traffic present.
kko-precedent_1989_90
Supreme Court dismisses prosecution for traffic offense where driver could not see child in dark icy conditions.

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, jolla oli ollut auton kuljettamiseen oikeuttava ajokortti vähemmän kuin vuoden ja joka olisi saanut kuljettaa autoa enintään 80 kilometrin tuntinopeudella, oli maantiellä 100 kilometrin nopeusrajoitusalueella kuljettanut autoa 130 kilometrin tuntinopeudella. Kihlakunnanoikeus oli katsonut A:n menettelyn olleen omiaan aiheuttamaan vaaraa liikenneturvallisuudelle ja tuominnut A:n rangaistukseen yksin teoin tehdyistä liikenteen vaarantamisesta ja liikennerikkomuksesta.

A:n muutoksenhakemuksesta hovioikeus katsoi hänen syyllistyneen vain liikenteen vaarantamiseen.

Lainvoimainen