Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO VL:2026-17 AI generated

Supreme Court allows prosecution for injury caused by traffic violation pending prior fine appeal.

Case Number KKO VL:2026-17
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal regarding the prosecution of a traffic offense for causing injury while a prior fine appeal was pending. The prosecutor sought charges for injury caused by the same driving incident, arguing the initial fine did not preclude further criminal liability. The court held that the pending administrative appeal does not bar the initiation of criminal proceedings for the same factual basis.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Penal Code s. 10; Traffic Offences Act s. 10: The pendency of an appeal against a traffic fine does not prevent the prosecution of a separate criminal charge for injury caused by the same traffic offense.

Keywords

AI generated
traffic offense injury caused pending appeal criminal prosecution procedural bar Supreme Court leave to appeal
AI generated
kko-leave_2025_27
Supreme Court allows appeal regarding use of prior statement as evidence in sexual assault case.
kko-leave_2026_24
Supreme Court allows appeal on conditions for granting leave to appeal in assault cases.
kko-precedent_2002_12
Supreme Court reverses lower court ruling that victim lost right to join prosecution due to pre-trial statement.
kko-leave_2025_214
Supreme Court rules on urgency requirement for delay compensation when defendants did not appeal first-instance conviction.
appeal_1979_eastern-finland__371
Court dismissed traffic negligence charge but convicted defendant for driving without license, leaving appeal unexamined.

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

Poliisimies oli antanut A:lle sakkomääräyksen liikenneturvallisuuden vaarantamisesta.

A oli hakenut määräykseen muutosta valittamalla käräjäoikeuteen. Valituksen johdosta

toimitetun esitutkinnan jälkeen ja valituksen ollessa yhä käsittelyssä

käräjäoikeudessa syyttäjä vaati A:lle saman ajotapahtuman perusteella rangaistusta

myös vammantuottamuksesta. Kysymys siitä, voitiinko syyte vammantuottamuksesta

tutkia.

Valituslupakortti sisältää kuvauksen siitä kysymyksestä, johon liittyen asiassa on

myönnetty valituslupa. Sen sisältö ei sido korkeinta oikeutta eikä rajoita asian

käsittelyä siltä osin kuin valituslupa on myönnetty.