Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 1571/1999 AI generated

Copyright claim for excessive damages rejected; matter belongs to court, not arbitration tribunal.

Case Number KKO 1571/1999
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the claim for the return of copyright damages paid in excess of contractual amounts. The plaintiff argued that the arbitration tribunal lacked jurisdiction under the Copyright Act to decide on such excess payments. The court ruled that the specific provision cited grants exclusive jurisdiction to the court, thereby excluding the arbitration tribunal from hearing this particular issue.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Copyright Act 1987, s. 54(1) para. 1; The court has exclusive jurisdiction over claims for the return of copyright damages exceeding contractual amounts, excluding arbitration tribunals.

Keywords

AI generated
copyright damages excessive payments arbitration jurisdiction court exclusive authority contractual limits

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Copyright Act 1987, s. 54(1) para. 1
AI generated
kko-precedent_2013_71
Supreme Court allows partial criminal dismissal but upholds full civil compensation due to defendant's admission of liability amounts.
kko-other_2004_2524
Supreme Court dismissed appeal regarding legal aid eligibility for asylum screening procedure costs.
kko-precedent_2005_14
Supreme Court remands case to lower court regarding arbitrator's liability for unnecessary litigation costs due to bias.
kko-other_2023_337
Supreme Court allows compensation claim by innocent detainee for loss of liberty due to state funds.
kko-precedent_2008_77
Supreme Court dismisses appeal when arbitrators exceed authority by ruling on grounds not raised by parties.

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

Kanteessa vaadittiin tekijänoikeuslain 47 §:n 1 momentissa tarkoitettujen korvausten palauttamista sillä perusteella, että korvauksia oli peritty enemmän kuin niitä korvausten määrää koskevat sopimukset huomioon ottaen olisi tullut periä. Kysymys siitä, kuuluiko asia tekijänoikeuslain 54 §:n 1 momentin 1 kohdan (309/1987) mukaan välimiesoikeuden yksinomaiseen toimivaltaan.

TekijänoikeusL 54 § 1 mom 1 kohta (309/1987)