FINLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Julia Pekkala, Mikko Leppä, Risto Sandvik and Nuutti Kortelainen, HPP Attorneys Ltd
13. Miscellaneous 13.1 Class Action or Group Arbitration Arbitration in Finland is based on consent between the parties, and there is no statutory framework for class or group arbitration akin to that found in some other jurisdictions. As such, mass claims or representative proceedings are not arbitrable unless all claimants and respondents agree to submit the dispute to arbi - tration under a mutually acceptable framework. The only exemption to this general rule is the redemp - tion (squeeze-out) procedure under the Finnish Lim - ited Liability Companies Act, where the redemption price payable by the majority (> 90%) shareholder to the minority shareholders is determined through a statutory arbitration procedure. 13.2 Ethical Codes Other than the requirements set out for arbitrators in the Arbitration Act (see 4.5 Arbitrator Requirements ), there are no mandatory ethical codes or other pro - fessional standards that would apply to counsel and arbitrators in Finland. Finnish attorneys-at-law must comply with the Finnish Bar Association’s Code of Conduct when acting as an arbitrator or counsel in arbitral proceedings. It is currently somewhat uncertain whether licensed legal counsel are required to adhere to their statutory code of conduct when they act as arbitrators or counsel in arbitral proceedings. 13.3 Third-Party Funding There are no statutory regulations concerning third- party funding in Finland. In other words, third-party funding is not prohibited and is used in practice, espe - cially in international arbitrations seated in Finland. Article 21.5 of the FAI Rules obligates the parties to disclose the existence and identity of third-party funders. While ad hoc proceedings do not have a specific rule regarding the matter, similar disclosure is nonetheless advisable. 13.4 Consolidation In practice, consolidation is possible only with express party agreement.
enforcement stage in Finland is limited. Success is restricted to the narrow category of disputes involv - ing genuine sovereign governmental acts (acta jure imperii), while the vast majority of commercial and pri - vate law matters (acta jure gestionis) cannot benefit from immunity protection. 12.3 Approach of the Courts Finnish courts have adopted a highly supportive approach to both domestic and international arbitra - tion, with a high threshold for refusal of recognition and enforcement. According to the Arbitration Act, a foreign award will not be recognised in Finland if the party against whom the award is being enforced furnishes proof that: • the arbitration agreement was invalid; • the party was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator or of the arbitration proceedings, or the party was otherwise unable to present its case; • the arbitral tribunal has exceeded its authority; • the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the pro - ceedings themselves substantially deviated from the agreement or the law of the state where the arbitration took place; or • the arbitral award has not yet become binding on the parties or it has been declared null and void or set aside or suspended in the state in which, or under the law of which, that award was made. The Arbitration Act does not contain the provision found in Article V 2. a) of the New York Convention. Consequently, a foreign arbitral award cannot be challenged if the subject matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under Finnish law, except where the award would also be against Finnish public policy. An arbitral award shall not be recognised to the extent that it is contrary to the public policy of Finland.
232 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook