Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 284/2017 Generato dall'IA

Limitation period for appeal begins when partners receive judgment, not when company is notified, leading to dismissal for late appeal.

Numero d'incarto KKO 284/2017
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 company's appeal because it was filed over six months after the partners received the lower court's judgment. Although the company was absent from the trial, the partners were legally responsible for the company's procedural rights. The court held that the limitation period for filing an appeal started only when the partners obtained notice of the judgment, rendering the late appeal inadmissible.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

OK 31 luku 1 § 1 mom 2 kohta; OK 2 § 2 mom: The limitation period for filing an appeal against a judgment in a partnership case begins when the partners responsible for the partnership receive notice of the judgment, not when the partnership itself is notified.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
partnership liability appeal limitation period notice of judgment late appeal dismissal procedural rights diritto all'indennizzo colpa d'organizzazione compensazione delle ore straordinarie

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
OK 31 luku 1 § 1 mom 2 kohta
OK 31 luku 1 § 1 mom 2 kohta OK 2 § 2 mom
OK 2 § 2 mom
OK 31 luku 1 § 1 mom 2 kohta OK 2 § 2 mom
Generato dall'IA
kko-precedent_2000_65
Supreme Court reverses lower court, holding ambiguous objection form requires clarification before dismissal.
appeal_1981_eastern-finland__1830
Court dismissed claim for proportional division of joint liability damages among multiple defendants.
kko-precedent_2011_51
Supreme Court allows appeal costs when lower court fails to state conditional liability in guarantee judgment.
kko-other_2003_630
Supreme Court dismisses lawyer's claim for co-responsibility for opposing party's court costs with client.
kko-other_2009_1384
Supreme Court allows company to sue in its own name to annul a one-sided lower court judgment.

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

Käräjäoikeus oli velvoittanut kommandiittiyhtiön ja sen vastuunalaiset yhtiömiehet suorittamaan yhteisvastuullisesti yksityisoikeudellisia korvauksia asianomistajalle. Kantelun johdosta hovioikeus poisti käräjäoikeuden tuomion kommandiittiyhtiötä koskevalta osalta, koska yhtiö oli ollut haastamatta poissa käräjäoikeuden pääkäsittelystä. Korkein oikeus katsoi, että määräaika kantelun tekemiseen oli alkanut, kun kommandiittiyhtiön vastuunalaiset yhtiömiehet olivat käräjäoikeuden tuomion antamispäivänä saaneet tuomiosta tiedon. Kun yhtiön kantelu oli tehty yli kuuden kuukauden kuluttua tiedon saamisesta, kantelu jätettiin myöhään tehtynä tutkimatta.

OK 31 luku 1 § 1 mom 2 kohta OK 2 § 2 mom