Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 344/2007 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court dismissed appeal regarding legal aid eligibility in pension disputes under specific fee provisions.

Numero d'incarto KKO 344/2007
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 of Finland dismissed the appeal concerning the obligation to pay court costs and the application of specific sections of the Legal Aid Act in a pension dispute. The appellant argued for eligibility based on financial circumstances, while the opposing party contended strict adherence to statutory thresholds for legal aid in this context. The court ruled that the statutory provisions did not support the appellant's claim for legal aid or cost exemption in this specific scenario.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Korkein oikeudenkäymiskaari 21 luvun 8 a ja 8 b §:n mukaan: Legal aid is not granted in pension disputes where the applicant's financial situation does not meet the strict statutory requirements for cost exemption.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
legal aid eligibility pension dispute court costs financial threshold Supreme Court appeal motivazione del mutamento giurisprudenza carenza di legittimazione diritto a condizioni minime d'esistenza

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Korkein oikeudenkäymiskaari 21 luvun 8 a ja 8 b §
Generato dall'IA
kko-other_2007_343
Supreme Court allows legal costs in pension disputes when the pension authority fails to provide sufficient evidence.
kko-other_2007_345
Supreme Court dismisses appeal regarding legal aid eligibility in pension disputes under specific procedural rules.
insurance_2002_10337-2000
Insurance Court dismissed appeal; prior pension decision terminated appeal, so lower court wrongly ordered cost reimbursement.
kko-precedent_2004_13
Supreme Court reduces losing party's court costs by deducting extra costs caused by the winning party's delay.
kko-precedent_1997_64
Supreme Court held child custody cases do not allow cost shifting unless specific reasons exist, unlike alimony disputes.

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

Kysymys oikeudenkäyntikulujen korvausvelvollisuudesta ja oikeudenkäymiskaaren 21 luvun 8 a ja 8 b §:n soveltamisesta eläkeoikeutta koskevassa riita-asiassa.