Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:2000:23 AI generated

Separate appeal against enforcement order requires same permission rules as main case appeal.

Case Number KHO:2000:23
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Administrative Court declared an appeal against a separate order refusing enforcement inadmissible because it lacked permission. The lower court had ruled on the enforcement refusal while leaving the main social assistance case pending, treating the appeal as a distinct procedural step. The court held that such separate appeals must follow the exact same sequence and limitations as appeals against the primary decision, thereby necessitating a prior permission to appeal.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Hallintolainkäyttölaki 79 § 1 mom. 4 kohta; Sosiaalihuoltolaki 49 § 2 mom.: An appeal against a separate decision refusing enforcement of a social assistance ruling is subject to the same permission requirements and procedural limits as an appeal against the main decision itself.

Keywords

AI generated
separate appeal procedure enforcement refusal order permission to appeal requirement social assistance case procedural limitations

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Hallintolainkäyttölaki 79 § 1 mom. 4 kohta
Hallintolainkäyttölaki 79 § 1 mom. 4 kohta
Sosiaalihuoltolaki 49 § 2 mom.
Sosiaalihuoltolaki 49 § 2 mom.
AI generated
admin_1989_turku-and-pori-county__589
Administrative court dismissed appeal, ruling vacation pay decisions require appeal to the agricultural committee, not the county court.
kho-precedent_1998_17
Supreme Administrative Court quashes lower court decision due to conflicting interpretations of permit requirements.
admin_1995_uusimaa-county__1375
Administrative court allows appeal on land value despite prior appeal on inheritance tax due to distinct legal issues.
admin_1995_central-finland-county__740
Administrative court dismissed appeal by transferring fire inspection order to municipal board under municipal law.
admin_1989_turku-and-pori-county__141
Shareholder's standing to appeal a building permit granted to the company for a sauna.

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

Lääninoikeus oli ratkaissut toimeentulotukiasiassa esitetyn perusturvalautakunnan päätöksen täytäntöönpanon kieltämistä koskevan hakemuksen erillisellä päätöksellä pääasian jäädessä edelleen lääninoikeuteen vireille. Korkein hallinto-oikeus katsoi, että haettaessa täytäntöönpanon kieltämistä koskevaan päätökseen erikseen muutosta, tämä tapahtui samassa järjestyksessä ja samoin rajoituksin kuin pääasian ratkaisuun muutosta haettaessa. Valittaminen edellytti siten valitusluvan myöntämistä.

Hallintolainkäyttölaki 79 § 1 mom. 4 kohta

Sosiaalihuoltolaki 49 § 2 mom.