The court's ruling addressed the municipal government's decision to close the high school section of Toila School, emphasizing that the unique needs of Estonian-speaking students were not adequately considered. The court pointed to the poor Estonian language proficiency among students in the region's state high schools, suggesting that the educational quality for Estonian-speaking students would likely be compromised at alternative institutions. The ruling thereby upheld the concerns raised by parents regarding the implications of this closure on their children's education.

Local authorities justified the closure by arguing that students could continue their high school education at nearby state high schools. However, a significant portion of these state schools serves students from Russian-speaking households, raising concerns about the suitability of these environments for Estonian-speaking students. The court highlighted that a more inclusive approach needed to be taken, ensuring that educational provisions were made that considered the linguistic and cultural backgrounds of the student population.

The implications of this ruling could set a precedent for future decisions regarding educational institutions in Estonia, especially in multicultural areas where different language communities coexist. It underscores the importance of considering the linguistic composition and specific community needs when making such critical educational policy decisions, ensuring all students have access to quality education in an appropriate environment.