Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
HFD:2006:12 AI generated

Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal against planning decision using administrative procedure law exclusion clause.

Case Number HFD:2006:12
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 appellants' appeal against the Administrative Court's decision to revoke a municipal zoning plan designating their land for small housing. The appellants argued against the planning decision, but the Administrative Court had already nullified the specific area in question based on procedural grounds. The Court upheld this decision by applying the exclusion clause of the Administrative Procedure Act, which bars appeals against decisions made under specific statutory provisions.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Administrative Procedure Act s. 33; Administrative Procedure Act s. 34 (1); Administrative Procedure Act s. 63 (1) 1: Appeals against decisions made pursuant to specific statutory provisions are inadmissible under the exclusion clause of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Keywords

AI generated
administrative procedure law exclusion clause inadmissible appeal zoning plan small housing area

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Land Use and Building Act s. 191 (3)
Administrative Procedure Act s. 33
Administrative Procedure Act s. 34 (1)
Administrative Procedure Act s. 63 (1) 1

Cited Case Law

AI generated
HFD:2003:102
Supreme Court dismisses landowner's appeal when zoning plan is partially revoked by lower court.
HFD 22.3.2006 T 639
AI generated
kho-other_2016_5516
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses wind farm planning appeal regarding lack of direct impact on residents' rights.
kho-precedent_2003_102
Supreme Court dismisses landowner's appeal when zoning plan is partially revoked by lower court.
admin_2017_aland__28
Administrative court dismissed appeal as municipal planning decision was not legally appealable under Åland laws.
kho-other_2016_3695
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeals against a coastal zone plan approval regarding badger habitat protection.
kho-other_2017_6262
Supreme Administrative Court dismisses appeal against zoning plan approval due to procedural compliance and lack of new grounds.

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

Kaupunginvaltuuston päätöksellä hyväksytyssä yleiskaavassa A:n ja B:n omistamalle C:n tilalle oli osoitettu asuinpientalojen alue (AP). Hallinto-oikeus oli eräiden maanomistajien valituksesta kumonnut kaupunginvaltuuston päätöksen mainitun AP-alueen osalta. Korkein hallinto-oikeus jätti maankäyttö- ja rakennuslain 191 §:n 3 momentin nojalla A:n ja B:n valituksen hallinto-oikeuden päätöksestä tutkimatta. Äänestys 6-2.

Maankäyttö- ja rakennuslaki 191 § 3 mom.

Hallintolainkäyttölaki 33 §, 34 § 1 mom ja 63 § 1 mom. 1 kohta

Ks. KHO:2003:102 ja KHO 22.3.2006 T 639.

Kort referat på svenska

---

[SV]

Stadfullmäktige hade antagit en generalplan i vilken ett område av A:s och B:s fastighet C anvisades för ett bostadsområde dominerat av småhus (AP). På besvär av vissa andra markägare upphävde förvaltningsdomstolen stadsfullmäktiges beslut till den del som beslutet gällde nämnda AP-område. A och B överklagade förvaltningsdomstolens beslut till högsta förvaltningsdomstolen, som avvisades besvären med stöd av 191 § 3 mom. i markanvändnings- och bygglagen. Omröstning 6-2.

Se HFD:2003:102 och HFD 22.3.2006 liggare 639.