A start permit does not guarantee a final certificate – Fire protection deficiencies halt new construction in Barkarby

Background

A residential development company was granted a building permit and subsequently a start permit for the construction of apartment buildings in Barkarby. During the construction, questions arose about whether the fire protection regulations were being met. After the completion of the buildings, the Building Committee in Järfälla Municipality issued a provisional final certificate for parts of the building, which meant that these could be temporarily used.

The Building Committee later decided not to grant a final certificate for the construction due to deficiencies regarding the accessibility for the fire service's vehicles to the parking spaces located in the properties' shared courtyard. The Building Committee stated that the building was not accessible for rescue operations in the required manner and that the applicable fire protection regulations were therefore not met.

However, the County Administrative Board and subsequently the Land and Environment Court considered that the deficient fire protection was not attributable to deviations from the building permit, the start permit, or the control plan, and that there were therefore no grounds to refuse the final certificate.

The Land and Environment Court of Appeal, however, made a different assessment and upheld the Building Committee's decision to refuse the final certificate.

The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which had to examine whether, despite the issued start permit, there were grounds to refuse the final certificate.

Supreme Court's Assessment

Initially, the Supreme Court reviewed the conditions for granting a building permit, a start permit, and a final certificate. The Supreme Court noted that the Building Committee, in connection with the assessment of whether a start permit should be granted, makes a forward-looking assessment regarding whether, for example, technical property requirements, including fire protection measures, can be assumed to be met. A final certificate is then issued if the Building Committee assesses that all requirements specified in, among other things, the start permit are completed. Following this, the Supreme Court stated that a final certificate can therefore be refused if the requirements are not practically met, despite the granted start permit. This applies even if there is no clear deviation from the basis in the start permit in relation to the final execution.

In the current case, the Supreme Court determined that the start permit did not mean that the Building Committee had made a final decision on whether the technical property requirements, including whether sufficient fire protection measures had been taken, were met. The start permit has therefore not constituted an obstacle to later refusing the final certificate. The Supreme Court upheld the judgment of the Land and Environment Court of Appeal, which meant that the Building Committee's decision to refuse the final certificate was upheld.

Summary Conclusions

The case leads to some unpredictability in the construction process regarding whether a final certificate will be issued despite a previously granted start permit. Therefore, from the perspective of the developers, there is reason to exercise caution and to conduct further investigations during the construction process regarding the measures taken, such as safety issues, and not to rely on the final certificate being obtained solely based on the previously granted start permit.