Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:1998:21 AI generated

Supreme Administrative Court allowed expanded pharmacy zone decision based on drug availability requirements under Pharmacy Act.

Case Number KHO:1998:21
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 allowed the Medicines Agency's decision to expand a pharmacy's licensed area beyond its original boundaries. The agency determined this action was necessary to meet drug availability standards set by the Pharmacy Act, and the court found no legal basis to invalidate the decision. Consequently, the court upheld the agency's authority to rezone the pharmacy area based on statutory requirements for public access to medicines.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Pharmacy Act 1996, s. 1; s. 39; s. 40: The Medicines Agency possesses the authority to designate a larger area for a pharmacy than originally granted if such an expansion is required to fulfill the statutory conditions for drug availability.

Keywords

AI generated
Pharmacy Act 1996 drug availability requirements pharmacy licensing area Medicines Agency authority administrative decision review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Pharmacy Act 1996, s. 1
Pharmacy Act 1996, s. 39
Pharmacy Act 1996, s. 40

Cited Case Law

AI generated
D:2207/3/97
AI generated
kho-precedent_1999_61
Conversion of pharmacy to side pharmacy met legal requirements; appeal dismissed without transfer to Council.
admin_2015_eastern-finland__433
Pharmacy board appeal dismissed; pharmacy service point applicant lacks standing as assessment doesn't affect other pharmacists' status.
kho-precedent_2010_65
Supreme Court allows new pharmacy approval in Riihimäki despite no proven drug access issues or major local changes.
admin_1988_water-superior__83
Administrative court dismissed appeal as Water Act evidence requirements were insufficient for cost comparison.
kho-precedent_2000_39
Supreme Administrative Court ruled that a separate company's turnover cannot be included in the pharmacy's turnover for tax purposes.

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

Lääkelaitoksella katsottiin olevan lääkelain muutoksen 895/1996 voimaantulosäännökseen perustuva toimivalta määrätä myös aikaisemmin apteekkioikeuden siihen kuuluvine oikeuksineen saaneelle apteekille lääkelain 40 §:ssä tarkoitettu aikaisempaa laajempi alue, jolla apteekin tulee sijaita. Lääkelaitoksen päätös täytti lääkkeiden saatavuudelle lääkelain 1 ja 39 §:ssä säädetyt edellytykset, eikä sitä ollut pidettävä lainvastaisena. Katso myös D:2207/3/97

Äänestys 4-1.