Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 239/2018 AI generated

Supreme Court allows union member to sue individually for transferred union dues despite individual payment orders.

Case Number KKO 239/2018
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Finland overturned the Court of Appeal's dismissal of a union member's lawsuit seeking recovery of union dues transferred to the union. The union member argued that, as a recipient of transferred dues, they possessed the right to sue individually for their share, even though specific payment orders existed for each employee. The court ruled that the statutory basis for the transfer of dues grants the recipient the standing to initiate such a claim in their own name.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Section 10 of the Trade Union Act 1987; Section 10 of the Trade Union Act 1987: A recipient of transferred union dues has the right to sue individually for the recovery of the transferred amount, notwithstanding individual payment orders issued to the employees.

Keywords

AI generated
union dues transfer standing to sue individual payment order trade union law recovery of funds supreme court ruling procedural standing

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Section 10 of the Trade Union Act 1987
AI generated
ECLI:FI:KKO:2018:8
Supreme Court allows union to sue in own name for transferred wage claims despite direct payment order.
labour_2018_27
Labor court dismissed union's appeal against employer's decision to terminate employee for gross misconduct.
labour_2002_89
Union union fined for strike over job transfer violating collective agreement management rights.
labour_2016_63
Union appeal dismissed; employer and shipowner not liable for union's strike action damages.
labour_2018_52
Labor court allows union claim against shipowner for dismissing trustee without majority consent and orders 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

Työntekijäliitto vaati kanteessaan, että työnantaja velvoitetaan suorittamaan työntekijöille näiden liitolle perittäväksi siirtämät työpalkkasaamiset. Hovioikeus katsoi, ettei liitolla ollut oikeutta omissa nimissään ajaa kannetta ja jätti kanteen tutkimatta. Korkein oikeus kumoten hovioikeuden päätöksen katsoi, että siirronsaajalla on perimissiirron perusteella oikeus omissa nimissään ajaa tällaista kannetta saatavan perimiseksi huolimatta siitä, että suorituksia oli vaadittu maksettavaksi kullekin työntekijälle.