FINLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Julia Pekkala, Mikko Leppä, Risto Sandvik and Nuutti Kortelainen, HPP Attorneys Ltd
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. 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. 4.2 Default Procedures 4. The Arbitral Tribunal 4.1 Limits on Selection As mentioned in 4.1 Limits on Selection , parties’ autonomy to select arbitrators is broad. The Arbitra - tion Act provides default procedures for appointing arbitrators when the parties have not agreed other - wise. Unless agreed otherwise, the number of arbitrators shall be three, and the party initiating the arbitration shall appoint one arbitrator in its notice of arbitration. The other party shall then appoint one arbitrator within 30 days of receiving the notice of arbitration. The arbi - trators thus appointed shall appoint one more arbitra - tor to act as the presiding arbitrator.
If a party fails to fulfil its obligation to appoint an arbi - trator within 30 days of receiving a notice of arbitra - tion, the other party may request a court to appoint the missing arbitrator. If the arbitrators appointed by the parties fail to appoint a presiding arbitrator, a court may appoint the presiding arbitrator at a party’s request. If the dispute is to be decided by a sole arbitrator but the parties have not agreed on the arbitrator within 30 days of the date when a party receives the notice of arbitration from the other party, any party may request the court to appoint the arbitrator. The FAI Rules also provide for specific default proce - dures for selecting arbitrators. Default Procedures in Multiparty Arbitration The Arbitration Act does not specifically address multiparty arbitration, but the default procedure used in bi-party arbitration is also applicable in multiparty arbitration. The FAI Rules provide for a default proce - dure applicable to multiparty arbitration. 4.3 Court Intervention As mentioned in 4.2 Default Procedures , in ad hoc arbitration, a court may appoint arbitrators where the parties fail to appoint the arbitrator themselves, or where the arbitrators appointed by the parties fail to appoint a presiding arbitrator. This intervention of the court is always subject to a request by a party to the arbitration. A court may also appoint arbitrators, at the request of a party, in cases where an appointed arbitrator dies, resigns or is removed. 4.4 Challenge and Removal of Arbitrators Under the Arbitration Act, on the challenge of a party, an arbitrator shall be disqualified if they would have been disqualified from hearing the case as a judge, or if other circumstances exist that give rise to justifi - able doubts as to their impartiality or independence as an arbitrator. The provisions on the disqualification of judges are contained in the Finnish Code of Judicial Procedure.
341 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook