Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 2939/2006 AI generated

Supreme Court dismissed claim for share of future property sale proceeds as statute of limitations expired.

Case Number KKO 2939/2006
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 a share of future property sale proceeds based on a prior partition agreement. The defendant argued the claim was time-barred, while the plaintiff contended the obligation to pay arose only upon the eventual sale of the remaining property. The court held that the statute of limitations for the claim had expired before the property was sold, rendering the claim inadmissible.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Section 10 of the Act on the Limitation of Actions; the statute of limitations for a claim based on a partition agreement regarding future proceeds expires at the time the underlying event occurs, barring recovery if the event has not yet happened.

Keywords

AI generated
statute of limitations partition agreement future proceeds time bar property division limitation period claim dismissal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Section 10 of the Act on the Limitation of Actions
AI generated
kko-precedent_1995_195
Supreme Court allows return of alimony paid during child's residence with payer despite prior settlement.
kko-precedent_1992_20
Supreme Court dismisses appeal: post-divorce property division cannot be undone by revoking a binding partition agreement.
kko-precedent_2003_23
Supreme Court allows late claim to modify settlement due to exploitation of unequal negotiation power.
appeal_1980_eastern-finland__369
Court dismissed claim that land sale was sham to transfer ownership jointly despite single name on deed.
kko-other_2000_680
Spousal compensation claim for exclusive use of joint property after divorce dismissed due to lack of fault.

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 ja B olivat osituksessa sopineet, että A sai omistamansa kiinteistöt ja B puolestaan sai 20 prosenttia A:lle jääneiden kiinteistöjen "aikanaan toteutuvista luovutushinnoista". A:n myytyä kiinteistöt B vaati kanteella ositukseen perustuvaa saatavaansa. Kysymys siitä, oliko B:n saatava vanhentunut.