Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 1059/2004 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses claim for unjust enrichment when prior final judgment bars review of illegal distribution.

Case Number KKO 1059/2004
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 plaintiff's claim for unjust enrichment regarding funds previously returned to the company. Although the plaintiff had repaid the company using amounts received from the defendant, a prior final judgment had already ordered the return of the entire illegal distribution. The court ruled that the finality of the earlier judgment precluded any new examination of the underlying transaction's legality.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

OYL 12 luku 5 §; When a prior final judgment orders the return of illegally distributed assets, a subsequent claim for unjust enrichment based on the same facts is barred by the principle of legal certainty.

Keywords

AI generated
unjust enrichment claim final judgment res judicata illegal asset distribution company law restitution legal certainty principle

Cited Legislation

AI generated
OYL 12 luku 5 §
AI generated
kko-precedent_1995_186
Shareholder dismissed claim against buyer for unjust enrichment due to illegal dividend distribution reversal.
kko-precedent_2003_112
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; dual recovery orders for same debt do not justify setting aside prior judgment.
appeal_1980_rovaniemi__372
Attempted theft charge dismissed where no property was shown stolen and facts suggest no property existed to endanger.
kko-other_1997_3455
Supreme Court dismisses appeal when judge handling return of judgment was previously involved in original case.
kko-other_1995_1448
Supreme Court dismisses claim that company director is personally liable for unauthorized loan repayment without bank consent.

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

A oli myynyt omistamansa yhtiön osakkeet B:lle. Osa kauppahinnasta oli maksettu niin, että B oli lainannut sen yhtiöstä. A oli edelleen maksanut yhtiölle velkojaan B:ltä saamaansa suoritusta vastaavalla määrällä. B:n maksettua yhtiölle takaisin osan siltä lainaamastaan summasta A oli lainvoimaisella tuomiolla velvoitettu osakeyhtiölain 12 luvun 5 §:n nojalla palauttamaan yhtiölle laittomasti jaettuina varoina koko B:n yhtiöstä lainaama kauppahinnan osa. A vaati uudessa oikeudenkäynnissä yhtiöltä perusteettoman edun palautuksena B:n yhtiölle lainasta jo takaisin maksamaa määrää. Aikaisemman laitonta varojen jakoa koskevan tuomion oikeusvoima esti kanteen tutkimisen.

OYL 12 luku 5 §