Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
HFD:2004:24 AI generated

Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal regarding unmarked hiking trails on a legally binding general plan.

Case Number HFD:2004:24
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 appeal against a decision to reject a general plan amendment. The applicant argued that unmarked hiking trails on the legally binding plan violated the Recreation Law's requirements for trail planning. The court held that while the trails were marked, the lack of specific directional signs did not automatically render the plan invalid under the relevant statutes.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Recreation Law s. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 13, 15; Planning and Building Act s. 9, 40; Municipalities Act s. 90: A legally binding general plan remains valid even if recreational trail markings lack explicit directional guidance, provided they meet the substantive planning requirements of the Recreation Law.

Keywords

AI generated
legally binding general plan recreation law requirements hiking trail markings administrative appeal dismissal planning and building act

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Recreation Law s. 1 para. 1 and 2
Ulkoilulaki 1 § 1 ja 2 mom., 2 § 1 mom., 3 §, 4 § 1 mom., 5 § 1 mom., 7 § 1 ja 2 mom., 13 § ja 15 §
Recreation Law s. 2 para. 1
Recreation Law s. 3
Recreation Law s. 4 para. 1
Recreation Law s. 5 para. 1
Recreation Law s. 7 para. 1 and 2
Recreation Law s. 13
Recreation Law s. 15
Planning and Building Act s. 9
Planning and Building Act s. 40
Municipalities Act s. 90
AI generated
kho-precedent_2008_17
Court allows trail route through property if minimal harm is caused compared to necessity.
ECLI:FI:KHO:2023:87
Supreme Administrative Court allows appeal, overturning lower court dismissal of mining plan approval due to insufficient water impact analysis.
admin_2019_eastern-finland__315
Administrative court dismissed appeal against cat owner's restriction on outdoor movement under animal welfare law.
market_2022_H390
Market Court dismissed appeal against regulator's ban on outsourcing railway platform tasks to a railway company.
kho-precedent_2004_84
Supreme Administrative Court allows appeal; zoning plan invalid due to lack of soil investigation under Planning and Building Act.

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

Oikeusvaikutteisen yleiskaavan kaavakartalle oli merkitty ulkoilureitistö. Ulkoilureittimerkintöjä ei ollut osoitettu ohjeellisina. Merkintöjen tuli ulkoilulain 13 § huomioon ottaen täyttää myös ulkoilulaissa ulkoilureittisuunnitelmalle asetetut vaatimukset.

Ulkoilulaki 1 § 1 ja 2 mom., 2 § 1 mom., 3 §, 4 § 1 mom., 5 § 1 mom., 7 § 1 ja 2 mom., 13 § ja 15 §

Maankäyttö- ja rakennuslaki 9 § ja 40 §

Kuntalaki 90 §

Kort referat på svenska

---

[SV]

På plankartan till en generalplan med rättsverkningar fanns friluftsleder markerade. Anteckningarna över friluftslederna var inte angivna som riktgivande. Med beaktande av 13 § i lagen om friluftsliv skulle anteckningarna också uppfylla de krav som ställs på planer för friluftsleder i lagen om friluftsliv.