Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 1059/2004 Generato dall'IA

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

Numero d'incarto KKO 1059/2004
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

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.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

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.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
unjust enrichment claim final judgment res judicata illegal asset distribution company law restitution legal certainty principle assunzione di debito rimborso del mutuo obbligo di restituzione

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
OYL 12 luku 5 §
Generato dall'IA
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.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

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 §