FINLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Julia Pekkala, Mikko Leppä, Risto Sandvik and Nuutti Kortelainen, HPP Attorneys Ltd
Conversely, the Arbitration Act includes certain provi - sions that are absent from the Model Law – eg, con -
The arbitrability of a dispute is decided by the arbi - tral tribunal on its own initiative or at the request of a party. However, the tribunal’s ruling does not bind a court tasked with determining whether the dispute is non-arbitrable. Any arbitral award relating to a non- arbitrable matter is deemed null and void. 3.3 National Courts’ Approach The Arbitration Act does not contain provisions on how to determine the law governing the arbitration agreement. If the parties have not agreed on the gov - erning law, it is to be decided by the arbitral tribunal or court reviewing the arbitration agreement. In practice, tribunals and courts will usually apply the law govern - ing the main agreement in which the arbitration clause is contained, or the law of the seat of arbitration. Finnish courts are very arbitration-friendly, and valid arbitration agreements are, as a rule, enforced. If a dispute pending before a general court is covered by an arbitration agreement, the court will decline juris - diction in the matter and will not take the matter into consideration. The court can only determine whether the arbitration agreement is valid, in force and appli - cable to the dispute in hand. An arbitration agreement must be invoked by a party to the dispute, and the court cannot decline jurisdiction on its own initiative. 3.4 Validity In Finland, the rule of separability is applied, and an arbitration clause is reviewed and assessed separate - ly from the rest of the contract in which the clause is contained. Therefore, an arbitral clause may be con - sidered valid even if the rest of the contract in which it is set forth is invalid.
cerning the arbitrability of a dispute. 2.2 Changes to National Law
Finland is currently in the process of reforming its Arbitration Act; a legislative proposal is expected to be submitted to Parliament in the spring of 2026. The purpose of the reform is to enhance the competitive - ness of Finnish arbitration by modernising the legisla - tion where necessary. As a result, the Arbitration Act will likely become even more closely aligned with the Model Law.
3. The Arbitration Agreement 3.1 Enforceability
According to the Arbitration Act, an arbitration agree - ment must be in writing to be valid. An arbitration agreement is deemed to be in writing if it is contained in a document signed by the parties or in correspond - ence between the parties. It is also considered to be in writing if the parties exchange letters or use elec - tronic communications in which they have agreed to have disputes settled in arbitration. The requirement of written form is also considered to be fulfilled if the arbitration agreement is incorporated by reference into an agreement that meets the above-mentioned requirements. In addition, an arbitration agreement must refer either to a specific legal relationship (eg, a specific contract or set of contracts) or to an existing dispute. An agree - ment to arbitrate all future disputes without specifying the substance or the basis of the dispute in any way would not be considered binding in Finland. 3.2 Arbitrability In accordance with the Arbitration Act, any dispute in a civil or commercial matter that can be settled by agree - ment can be referred to arbitration. Consequently, an arbitral tribunal cannot rule on, for example, criminal matters, divorce or child custody matters. However, the fact that the matter under arbitration may contain acts that constitute a criminal offence does not limit the arbitrability of the related civil claims.
4. The Arbitral Tribunal 4.1 Limits on Selection
Parties’ autonomy to select arbitrators is broad. How - ever, it has been generally held in Finnish legal lit - erature that an arbitration agreement cannot validly provide for one party’s right to appoint more arbitra - tors than the other, nor for the sole arbitrator to be appointed exclusively by one party. It is also not per - mitted for an entity closely affiliated with a party to choose the sole arbitrator or the presiding arbitrator.
224 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook