FINLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Julia Pekkala, Mikko Leppä, Risto Sandvik and Nuutti Kortelainen, HPP Attorneys Ltd
• the arbitral award is not in writing or signed by the arbitrators. There is no time limit to challenge an award as null and void. An arbitral award may be set aside if: • the arbitral tribunal exceeded its authority; • an arbitrator had not been properly appointed; • an arbitrator could have been disqualified but a challenge duly made by a party had not been accepted before the arbitral award was made; • a party was not aware of the grounds for disqualifi - cation and was not able to challenge the arbitrator before the arbitral award was rendered; or • the arbitral tribunal did not give a party sufficient opportunity to present its case. An action for setting aside an award must be brought before the District Court in whose circuit the award was given within three months of the date on which the party received a copy of the award. For minor errors, the primary remedy is to provide the arbitrators with an opportunity to correct or supple - ment the arbitral award. 11.2 Excluding/Expanding the Scope of Appeal It is generally accepted in Finland that a party cannot waive its right to challenge an award before the award has been rendered. However, a party may forfeit its right to rely on specific grounds for annulling an award through its conduct. For instance, if a party fails to raise objections regarding an arbitrator’s eligibility or impartiality when it was aware of such issues, that party may be considered to have relinquished its right to challenge the award on those particular grounds. In the absence of legislative guidelines and case law, it is unclear whether parties can agree on the right of appeal or expand the scope of challenge under Finn - ish law. In legal literature, it has been held that parties cannot by agreement impose new tasks on the court or deviate from the procedural rules binding the court. A court cannot, on the basis of an arbitration clause, be compelled to act as an appellate body, since no
such judicial function is provided for by statute such as the Arbitration Act. On the other hand, the possibility of extending the grounds for nullity and setting aside remains fairly open. 11.3 Standard of Judicial Review Finnish law establishes a deferential standard with no judicial review of the merits of arbitral awards. Courts are limited to examining specific procedural and juris - dictional issues through the exhaustive grounds pro - vided in the Arbitration Act. Finland is a signatory to the New York Convention, which has been in force in Finland without reserva - tions since 19 April 1962. 12.2 Enforcement Procedure In order for an arbitral award to be enforceable, a deci - sion on the enforcement of the award shall be made by a District Court. An application for the enforcement of an arbitral award shall be submitted to the District Court, together with the original arbitration agreement and the original award or certified copies of both. If any of the documents are in a language other than Finnish or Swedish, a certified translation into either of these languages must also be provided, unless the court grants an exemption. Before enforcement is granted, the party against whom enforcement is sought shall be given an oppor - tunity to be heard, unless there are special reasons to the contrary. 12. Enforcement of an Award 12.1 New York Convention As a general rule, if a court at the seat of arbitration has set aside an award, such award will not be rec - ognised or enforced in Finland. If there are ongoing set-aside proceedings at the seat, the Finnish court may postpone its decision on enforcing the award, if it finds it appropriate to do so. The extent to which states or state entities may suc - cessfully raise sovereign immunity as a defence at the
231 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook