Supreme Court held that general courts lack jurisdiction to examine civil damages claims arising from criminal proceedings.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal regarding the jurisdiction of general courts to hear civil damages claims incidental to criminal proceedings. The applicant argued that such claims should be adjudicated by general courts, while the opposing party contended that criminal courts exclusively handle incidental civil matters. The court ruled that Finnish law reserves the jurisdiction over incidental civil claims in criminal cases for the criminal court itself, thereby excluding general courts from this specific procedural path.