Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:1997:44 AI generated

Supreme Administrative Court dismisses claim for stamp duty refund due to invalid mortgage security registration.

Case Number KHO:1997:44
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant's claim for a refund of stamp duty paid on three mortgage security certificates. The applicant had previously obtained a court order declaring the underlying property sale and mortgage registration void, yet the court found the duty was correctly levied because the security certificates themselves were never properly stamped. Consequently, the applicant bears the cost of the duty since the defect lay in the failure to affix the required stamps, not in the validity of the underlying transaction.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

LeimaveroL 45 §; LeimaveroL 47 §; LeimaveroL 48 §; LeimaveroL 95 §: Stamp duty is payable on mortgage security certificates regardless of the subsequent invalidity of the underlying security registration if the certificates themselves were not properly stamped at the time of issuance.

Keywords

AI generated
stamp duty refund mortgage security certificates invalid registration stamp affixation requirement Supreme Administrative Court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
LeimaveroL 45 §
LeimaveroL 47 §
LeimaveroL 48 §
LeimaveroL 95 §
AI generated
admin_1986_vaasa-county__3751
Spousal joint property purchase requires separate auction request only if ownership share is unclear.
admin_2000_turku__540
Administrative court orders tax authority to refund stamp duty where land transferor was not legally required to register title.
kko-precedent_1995_144
Supreme Court allows bank claim against borrower for debt arising from a fraudulent loan scheme. The court held that the bank's knowledge of the fraud made the claim not contrary to good faith.
kko-precedent_1998_106
Supreme Court dismisses claim for unjust enrichment when bank receives partial payment from buyer's installment used to reduce seller's mortgage debt.
kko-precedent_2002_17
Supreme Court of Finland dismisses appeal, ruling defendant knowingly sold property still owned by the finance company.

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

X oli 16.8.1989 vahvistetulla kauppakirjalla ostanut kiinteistön. Kauppahinnan maksamista varten hän oli samana päivänä nostanut pankista 420.500 mk:n lainan. Pankille lainasta tunnustamansa käärevelkakirjan maksamisen vakuudeksi X oli niin ikään samana päivänä allekirjoittanut ja pankille luovuttanut yhteensä 400.000 mk:n määräiset kolme haltijavelkakirjaa, jotka oli varustettu 6.400 markan leimamerkein. X:lle oli myönnetty 6.9.1989 lainhuuto tilaan, ja samalla kertaa myös vahvistettu kiinnitys haltijavelkakirjojen pääoman, korkojen ja kulujen maksamisen vakuudeksi. Sittemmin oli tuomioistuimen lainvoimaisella päätöksellä kiinteistönkauppa ja X:lle myönnetty lainhuuto julistettu mitättömiksi ja samalla kiinnitys käynyt mitättömäksi. X:llä ei ollut oikeutta saada takaisin haltijavelkakirjoihin kiinnitettyjen leimamerkkien arvoa, koska pankille tunnustettu käärevelkakirja ei ollut ollut asianmukaisesti leimattu.

Äänestys 3-2

LeimaveroL 45 §

LeimaveroL 47 §

LeimaveroL 48 §

LeimaveroL 95 §