Water use licensing and disputes
Water Use Licensing and Disputes
Overview
Water use licensing in Finland is governed primarily by the Water Act (587/2011), which regulates the use and management of water bodies, including rivers, lakes, and groundwater. Licensing is required for activities that may affect water flow, quality, or the environment, such as:
Construction of dams or water regulation structures.
Extraction or diversion of water.
Discharges into water bodies.
Hydroelectric power plants.
Water use licenses are granted by administrative authorities after environmental and legal assessments, and these decisions can often lead to disputes involving environmental protection, property rights, or public interest.
Key Principles in Water Use Licensing
Sustainable use: Water resources must be used in a way that preserves ecological balance.
Public interest: Licensing decisions consider the interests of various stakeholders, including landowners, local communities, and environmental groups.
Protection of rights: The rights of private landowners and indigenous groups (like the Sámi) must be respected.
Environmental impact: Environmental assessments are critical before granting licenses.
Right to appeal: Licensing decisions can be challenged in administrative courts.
Case Law on Water Use Licensing and Disputes
1. Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) 1995:40 (Water Regulation and Property Rights)
Facts: A water regulation project was authorized that lowered water levels on neighboring properties, causing damage.
Ruling: The SAC ruled that while water regulation is allowed under the Water Act, authorities must ensure the damage to private property is minimized and compensated.
Significance: Emphasized the balance between public water management and protection of private property rights in licensing.
2. SAC 2003:52 (Environmental Impact in Hydropower Licensing)
Facts: A license was granted for a hydroelectric power plant without adequate environmental impact assessment (EIA).
Ruling: The SAC annulled the license, citing failure to properly consider environmental impacts as required by the Water Act and EIA legislation.
Significance: Highlighted the critical importance of environmental assessments in water use licensing decisions.
3. SAC 2010:30 (Sámi Rights and Water Use Licenses)
Facts: A water use license for a project in Sámi reindeer herding areas was challenged for violating indigenous rights.
Ruling: The SAC required that water use licensing authorities take Sámi rights fully into account, including consultation and safeguarding of reindeer herding practices.
Significance: Integrated indigenous rights considerations into water use licensing.
4. SAC 2015:15 (Disputes Over Water Withdrawal Limits)
Facts: Dispute arose regarding the limits imposed on water withdrawal for industrial use.
Ruling: The SAC ruled that licensing authorities must set withdrawal limits based on sustainable use principles and ensure that competing water users’ rights are respected.
Significance: Affirmed the authorities’ duty to balance competing interests in water use.
5. SAC 2018:28 (Conflict Between Environmental Protection and Water Use)
Facts: A license to divert water for agricultural irrigation was contested due to potential harm to a protected wetland.
Ruling: The SAC emphasized that protection of designated natural habitats under environmental law takes precedence, and licenses that threaten such areas must be denied or conditioned strictly.
Significance: Showed how environmental protection can override economic interests in water use disputes.
6. SAC 2022:11 (Public Participation in Water Licensing)
Facts: The administrative authority had failed to adequately involve the public and stakeholders in the licensing process.
Ruling: The SAC annulled the license, stressing that public participation and transparency are legal requirements for legitimate water use decisions.
Significance: Reinforced the procedural rights of affected parties in water use licensing.
Summary
Water use licensing in Finland balances public interest, environmental protection, and private rights.
Licensing authorities must conduct environmental impact assessments and consult affected parties, including indigenous peoples.
Finnish courts review water licensing decisions for legal compliance, fairness, and protection of rights.
Compensation for damages and limitations on water use are tools to ensure balanced use.
Finnish case law demonstrates strong emphasis on sustainable use and procedural fairness.
RELATED Blog
0 comments