FINLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Julia Pekkala, Mikko Leppä, Risto Sandvik and Nuutti Kortelainen, HPP Attorneys Ltd
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.
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. Note that this area of law is subject to pending legisla - tive reform; see 2.2 Changes to National Law . 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
12. Enforcement of an Award 12.1 New York Convention
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. 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 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.
348 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook