Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 1148/2016 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court dismisses appeal regarding public defender's liability for state's share of legal aid costs.

Numero d'incarto KKO 1148/2016
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 a public defender to reimburse the state for their share of legal aid costs. The Court of Appeal held the defender liable based on the procedural rules governing public legal aid, while the defender argued against this financial responsibility. The Supreme Court upheld the lower court's decision, confirming that the public defender must cover the state's portion of the costs incurred during the proceedings.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Lain 1091/1972 10 §; Lain 1091/1972 11 §: The public defender is legally obligated to reimburse the state for its share of the legal aid costs incurred during the proceedings.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
public defender liability legal aid costs state reimbursement court of appeal supreme court appeal difetto di legittimazione del ministero pubblico azione revocatoria fallimentare diritto a un difensore

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Lain 1091/1972 10 §
Lain 1091/1972 11 §
Generato dall'IA
kko-precedent_2002_107
Supreme Court allows defense lawyer fees when appeal challenges clear oral evidence in criminal case.
kko-other_1995_1214
Supreme Court dismisses appeal when lower court rejects claim on grounds not raised by respondent.
kko-other_2001_1617
Supreme Court dismissed appeal where lower court awarded price reduction instead of full restitution for property error.
appeal_1973_vaasa__281
Court of Appeal corrected a calculation error in a reduction order under the 1973 Act on Reduction of Sentence.
kko-precedent_2009_84
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; ECHR violation did not constitute a procedural error affecting the trial outcome.

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 pääasian ratkaistessaan velvoittanut oikeusavun saajan, jota oli tuomioistuimessa avustanut julkinen oikeusavustaja, korvaamaan valtiolle omavastuuosuutensa määrän. Kysymys hovioikeuden menettelyn oikeellisuudesta.