Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO VL:2026-19 AI generated

City's expropriation claim dismissed; private property owner's compensation claim upheld for loss of privacy.

Case Number KKO VL:2026-19
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Finland partially allowed the city's request for an expropriation proceeding to acquire rights for a public path and recreation area. The lower court ordered compensation to the private homeowner for the loss of privacy caused by the expropriation. The court upheld the compensation order while rejecting the city's broader claim to acquire the full ownership rights without further justification.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Lunastuslaki 35 §; The court held that when expropriating private property for public recreation areas, the state must compensate the owner for specific losses such as the loss of privacy, but the acquisition of full ownership rights requires separate legal justification beyond mere compensation.

Keywords

AI generated
expropriation proceeding loss of privacy compensation for damage public recreation area private property rights Lunastuslaki 35 Supreme Court of Finland

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Lunastuslaki 35 §
AI generated
kho-other_2017_4566
Supreme Administrative Court dismissed appeal regarding road advertising permit denial based on missing photos for statutory discretion.
kko-precedent_2014_2
Supreme Court holds that land value increase due to zoning plan preparation counts if the decision was publicly announced, even without a formal plan approval. The court ruled in favor of the municipality's claim to deduct value appreciation from compensation.
kko-precedent_1992_53
Supreme Court dismisses street compensation claim for undeveloped green areas marked as roads in zoning plans.
kko-precedent_1990_58
Supreme Court dismisses claim that compensation for quarry damage must be handled in expropriation proceedings when building permit applies.
kko-precedent_1999_52
Supreme Court dismissed claim for compensation for land value loss due to street relocation under Building Act. The court held that the loss was not unreasonable or special damage warranting compensation. The court ruled that the loss was not unreasonable or special damage warranting compensation.

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

Kaupunki oli hakenut lunastustoimitusta saadakseen lunastaa omistusoikeuden

asemakaavassa katu- ja lähivirkistysalueeksi osoitettuihin alueisiin. Maaoikeus

määräsi omakotitalokiinteistön omistajille yksityisyyden menettämisen aiheuttamasta

haitasta korvausta. Kysymys haitankorvauksen määräämisen perusteista.

LunastusL 35 §

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.