Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:1997:65 AI generated

Supreme Administrative Court allows compensation for construction delays caused by nature protection ban under section 18(2).

Case Number KHO:1997:65
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Administrative Court ruled that construction costs incurred due to delays caused by a nature protection ban must be compensated. The applicants argued they had met construction deadlines before the ban and intended to use or rent the buildings during the ban period. The court held that these specific costs qualify for compensation under the relevant nature protection law provision.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Luonnonsuojelulain 18 § 2 mom; Costs incurred by applicants due to construction delays caused by a nature protection ban are compensable if the applicants were able to complete construction before the ban and intended to use the buildings during the ban period.

Keywords

AI generated
nature protection ban construction delay compensation property rights restriction administrative compensation building permit delay

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Luonnonsuojelulain 18 § 2 mom
AI generated
admin_1993_water-superior__231
Administrative court dismisses claim for specific performance and allows partial compensation for structural damage caused by water level rise.
admin_1996_turku-and-pori-county__339
Construction court allowed work on building permit pending appeal due to changed circumstances.
admin_2013_aland__22
Administrative court dismisses appeal when building permit authority ignores neighbor hearing rights under Åland planning law.
kho-other_2017_4109
Appeal dismissed; late response ignored, and planning authority members not biased by store interests.
kho-other_2026_658
Supreme Administrative Court allows appeal against administrative court dismissal of building relocation order based on private contract dispute.

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

Hakijat olivat alueelle luonnonsuojelulain 18 §:n 2 momentin nojalla määrätyn toimenpidekiellon voimassaoloaikana estyneet käyttämästä kiinteistöjään heille ennen toimenpidekiellon antamista myönnettyjen rakennuslupien mukaiseen lomarakentamiseen. Tästä rakentamisen viivästymisestä hakijoille aiheutuneita kustannuksia, ottaen huomioon, että hakijat olisivat kiellon voimassaoloaikana ehtineet rakentaa lomarakennukset ja käyttää niitä itse tai vuokrata rakennukset ainakin osaksi kiellon voimassaoloaikaa, oli pidettävä laadultaan sellaisina kustannuksina, jotka mainitun säännöksen mukaan oli hakijoille korvattava.

LuonnonsuojeluL 18 § 2 mom (71/23)