The hospital actions won in the Supreme Court. The state must face them in the district court

The hospital actions in Oslo have throughout been very critical of the planned hospital development, which involves, among other things, a major expansion of Aker and Gaustad and the closure of Ullevål hospital. In order to stop the plans, they have taken legal action against the state. Now the Supreme Court has decided that the state must face them in court.

Published 8 May 24 at 14:44

Updated 8 May 24 at 15:05

In the lawsuit against the state and the Ministry of Local Government and District Affairs, the hospital actions have argued that the zoning plans, which are now subject to state regulation, have been adopted in violation of the EU’s planning directive. Norway is obliged to follow them through the EEA Agreement.

The state has had the case rejected in previous court rounds, but the hospital actions have appealed the decisions. Now they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. Thus, the state must face them in the district court.

– This is a big victory. I have read the ruling from the Supreme Court many times. We have put a lot of effort into getting this case dealt with in the legal system. It has cost a lot of money, everything has been collected by rolling kroner among our supporters. We had begun to fear that it was all in vain and even began to lose some faith in the judiciary. It is liberating to know that we were right, that we and not least our lawyer have judged things correctly. When the Supreme Court sees things in the same way as us, it gives great faith that we will win with the lawsuit itself as well. Now I feel certain that we will succeed in getting the zoning plans for Nye Rikshospitalet and Nye Aker declared invalid. New plans must then be drawn up for the Oslo hospitals, and use of the Ullevål site will be an alternative that must be investigated. Keeping the Rikshospitalet as it is today, building a clean local hospital for the whole of Groruddalen in Aker and further developing Ullevål hospital with new buildings such as the large emergency hospital, is a far better and more affordable alternative, says Lene Haug, manager of Redd Ullevål Hospital.

The hospital actions are represented by Hege Skogseth Berg in NORDIA Law. She says the following after the ruling is ready:

– The case is based on the State breaking central rules for environmental protection, rules which the State has undertaken to follow through the EEA Agreement. We will now continue our argument to the district court that the fundamental question of the case must be submitted to the EFTA Court for a decision as soon as possible. The allegations in the case are that the existing permits for development are illegal and that the court must stop them. By continuing the costly work, which may be completely wasted if the court upholds Redd Ullevål, the State is gambling with billions of dollars that could have benefited Norwegian patients.