Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:1999:3 AI generated

Supreme Administrative Court held that a zoning plan is not a regulation under the Planning Act and cannot be bypassed.

Case Number KHO:1999:3
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 request to have a zoning plan provision inapplicable under the Planning Act. The applicant sought to place a grocery store on an industrial plot, arguing the zoning rule prohibiting such use violated the law. The court ruled that zoning plans do not fall under the specific exemption clause of the Planning Act, meaning the planning authority was legally bound to reject the construction permit based on the zoning regulations.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Planning Act s. 92 § 2 mom.; Planning Act s. 42 § 1 mom.; A zoning plan is not a regulation subject to the inapplicability clause of the Planning Act, and construction permits must be denied if they violate binding zoning regulations.

Keywords

AI generated
zoning plan interpretation Planning Act exemption construction permit denial industrial zone usage administrative review scope

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Planning Act s. 92 § 2 mom.
Planning Act s. 42 § 1 mom.
Building Decree s. 53 § 1 mom.
AI generated
admin_2026_helsinki__4926
Temporary construction permit without planning variance approval is invalid under construction act provisions.
admin_2007_helsinki__1820
Planning authority decision revoked for violating planning act and causing unequal treatment of landowners.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2019:44
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal against zoning plan approval due to conditional road access requirements.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2020:52
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal regarding partial planning scheme obsolescence under Finnish Planning Act. Court upheld city's power to declare specific plot obsolete. Partial obsolescence of planning scheme is permitted under Planning Act. City may declare specific plot obsolete under Planning Act. Partial obsolescence of planning scheme is permitted under Planning Act.
kho-precedent_2013_87
Supreme Court allows appeal dismissing city council's beach zoning decision as legally invalid due to conflicting general plan guidance.

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

Rakennuslupahakemus sisälsi päivittäistavaramyymälän sijoittamisen tontille, joka asemakaavassa oli teollisuus- ja varastorakennusten korttelialuetta (T). Tonttia koski kaavamääräys, jonka mukaan 30 prosenttia rakennusalalle sallitusta kerrosalasta saatiin käyttää liike- ja toimistotiloja varten. Lainvoimaisen kaavamääräyksen mukaan korttelialueelle ei saanut sijoittaa päivittäistavaramyymälää. Rakennuslautakunta hylkäsi rakennuslupahakemuksen asemakaavan vastaisena.

Luvanhakija vaati, että päivittäistavaramyymälän sijoittamisen kieltävä kaavamääräys tuli lainvastaisena jättää hallitusmuodon 92 §:n 2 momentin nojalla soveltamatta. Korkein hallinto-oikeus katsoi, että asemakaava ei ole hallitusmuodon 92 §:n 2 momentissa tarkoitettu säädös. Rakennuslautakunta ei siten ollut voinut mainitun lainkohdan nojalla jättää soveltamatta kaavamääräystä, vaan sen oli tullut hylätä rakennuslupahakemus asemakaavan vastaisena.

Hallitusmuoto 92 § 2 mom.

Rakennuslaki 42 § 1 mom.

Rakennusasetus 53 § 1 mom.