Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VakO 22.6.1995/4488:94 AI generated

Insurance court allows late criminal damage claim due to victim's minority and special circumstances.

Case Number VakO 22.6.1995/4488:94
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court allowed a claim for criminal damage compensation filed four years after the statutory deadline. The victim became an adult after the crime, and the guardian had not been informed of the offense at the time. The court found the victim's minority and the specific nature of the crime created special circumstances justifying the exception to the time limit.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Rikosvahinkolain 10 a luku 1 ja 10 a luku 2: A claim for criminal damage compensation filed after the statutory period is admissible if the victim was a minor at the time of the crime and special circumstances exist.

Keywords

AI generated
criminal damage compensation statute of limitations victim minority special circumstances insurance court jurisdiction exception to time limit guardian knowledge

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Rikosvahinkolain 10 a luku 1
Rikosvahinkolain 10 a luku 2
AI generated
insurance_2004_7840-2002
Permanent impairment compensation denied when prosthetic use does not cause significant functional disability.
appeal_1983_helsinki__2012
Court of Appeal upheld mandatory life imprisonment for repeat burglary despite youth and prior record.
admin_2021_eastern-finland__82
Court dismisses appeal as police correctly assessed applicant's suitability based on past serious crimes.
kko-precedent_2005_35
Supreme Court voids penalty order for failure to deduct time in custody from fine in drug offense case.
insurance_1992_284-1992
Insurance court dismissed delayed compensation claim citing police investigation delay as insufficient special reason under RIVL 15.

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

Rikosvahinkolain mukaista korvausta oli haettu keväällä 1988 tapahtuneen jatketun lapseen kohdistuneen haureuden johdosta 12.4.1994. Rikoksen uhri oli tullut täysi-ikäiseksi 12.2.1992 ja holhooja ei ollut saanut aikoinaan tietoa rikoksesta. Huomioon ottaen ikä rikoksen tekohetkellä sekä rikoksen laatu ja tekotapa katsottiin, että oli olemassa erityinen syy hakemuksen tutkimiseksi, vaikka sitä ei ollut tehty säädetyssä kahden vuoden määräajassa. VII-jaosto