Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 2022/2013 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court dismissed appeal regarding state defense lawyer fee liability when client had right to free legal aid.

Numero d'incarto KKO 2022/2013
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 appeal against the Court of Appeal's order for the respondent to pay the state's defense lawyer fees. The respondent argued they were entitled to free legal aid without a co-contribution, yet the lower court held them liable for the fees. The court ruled that the lower court correctly applied the law by requiring payment despite the respondent's eligibility for free aid.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Section 10 of the Legal Aid Act 1999; Section 10 of the Legal Aid Act 1999: A party liable for defense costs remains so even if they qualify for free legal aid without co-contribution.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
legal aid co-contribution defense lawyer fees state liability legal aid eligibility fee reimbursement restituzione dei sussidi statali compensazione della rendita imputazione dei pagamenti

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Section 10 of the Legal Aid Act 1999
Generato dall'IA
kko-other_2008_688
Supreme Court dismisses lawyer's fee claim when defense mandate is legally suspended during appeal proceedings.
kko-precedent_1992_36
Supreme Court allows lawyer fee for assisting defendant in lower court appeal but denies appeal filing fee.
kko-other_1999_1823
Supreme Court allows appeal regarding payment made after lower court judgment to be considered in final ruling.
kko-precedent_1999_1
Supreme Court remands debt restructuring case for retrial due to failure to inform debtor of non-personal liability debts.
kko-precedent_2002_109
Supreme Court allows lawyer fees when appeal is not clearly baseless despite defendant's absence.

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

Hovioikeus oli velvoittanut vastaajan korvaamaan valtiolle tämän puolustajalle hovioikeudessa valtion varoista maksettavaksi määrätyn palkkion, vaikka vastaajalla olisi ollut oikeus oikeusapuun ilman omavastuuosuutta. Kysymys hovioikeuden menettelyn oikeellisuudesta.