Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HAO 21.11.2002 02/0202/3 AI generated

Administrative court quashes environmental permit decision due to applicant's material change of permit location without consent.

Case Number Vaasan HAO 21.11.2002 02/0202/3
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Administrative Court of Finland quashed the environmental board's decision and remanded the case for re-evaluation. The applicant had initially consented to a permit location change only if the neighbor withdrew their appeal, but subsequently filed a new application to move the wind turbine. Because this change was material and the original plan was no longer valid, the court could not rule on the initial appeal, rendering the applicant's condition for the permit's validity impossible to meet.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Ympäristölain (1093/1999) 10 §; 11 §: If an applicant materially changes the subject matter of an environmental permit application after consenting to a specific plan, the administrative court must quash the decision based on the original plan and remand the case to the competent authority for a new decision on the modified plan.

Keywords

AI generated
environmental permit material change administrative court remand for re-evaluation wind turbine location conditional consent procedural impossibility

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Ympäristölaki 1093/1999 10 §
Ympäristölaki 1093/1999 11 §
AI generated
admin_2004_vaasa__67
Court ruled that a change in waste treatment plant requirements requires a full new permit, not a temporary one.
admin_2003_vaasa__17
Administrative court ruled that a significantly different site constitutes a new project requiring fresh environmental permit approval.
kko-other_2010_2458
Supreme Court dismisses appeal withdrawal objection, ruling procedural silence does not equate to formal withdrawal.
kko-other_2001_2624
Supreme Court dismisses appeal as withdrawn; applicant withdrew appeal, halting proceedings.
kko-other_2012_203
Supreme Court dismisses appeal withdrawal objection, ruling procedural silence does not equate to consent to withdrawal.

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

Sikalatoimintaa koskevan ympäristöluvan hakija oli naapurin luvan kumoamista koskevaan valitukseen antamassaan vastineessa ilmoittanut suostuvansa sikalan siirtämiseen noin 100 metrillä, jos naapuri peruttaa valituksensa ja muut lupaehdot säilyvät ennallaan. Asiakirjoista ilmeni, että hakija oli pannut kunnan ympäristölautakunnassa vireille uuden hakemuksen sikalan paikan muuttamiseksi.

Hallinto-oikeus kumosi ympäristölautakunnan päätöksen ja palautti asian lautakunnalle uudelleen käsiteltäväksi. Hallinto-oikeus katsoi hakijan tosiasiallisesti muuttaneen hakemusta sijaintipaikan osalta, joten asiaa ei voitu hallinto-oikeudessa ratkaista alkuperäisen suunnitelman perusteella. Koska muutos ei ollut vähäinen, asia oli käsiteltävä ja ratkaistava ympäristölautakunnassa uutena asiana muutetun suunnitelman perusteella. Hakijan edellytys ympäristölautakunnan myöntämän luvan jäämisestä voimaan ei siten ollut mahdollinen.

Päätökseen annettiin valitusosoitus lupapäätöksen kumoamisen osalta.

Lainvoimainen