FINLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Marja Norrena, Maija Ahtiainen and Valmari Keskimäki, Lieke Attorneys Ltd
5.2 Discovery and Third Parties The court can order a third party to produce a docu- ment or object that may be used as evidence, pro- vided that certain conditions are met. See 5.4 Alterna- tives to Discovery Mechanisms . 5.3 Discovery in This Jurisdiction See 5.4 Alternatives to Discovery Mechanisms . 5.4 Alternatives to Discovery Mechanisms The Finnish courts have the power to order the pro- duction of documents or objects that are in the pos- session of a party or third party. The document or object must be relevant as evidence in the case, and it must be shown that the document or object is in the possession of the person to whom the production request is addressed. In practice, the party requesting the production of a document must be able to identify the document with sufficient precision for it to ultimately be enforceable. Sufficient identifying includes naming the issue to be proven by the document, its type and date of creation. Therefore, a party cannot successfully make general requests for all documents of a certain type, which makes the Finnish document production regime more restrictive in comparison to many other jurisdictions. 5.5 Legal Privilege Legal privilege is recognised under Finnish law. The principles governing this privilege are derived from, inter alia, the Finnish Attorneys Act, the Code of Con- duct for Attorneys at Law issued by the Delegation of the Finnish Bar Association and the Code of Judicial Procedure. Communications between an attorney-at-law and their client are privileged. Legal privilege also applies to communications by and between the client, where privileged information is shared or discussed, even if the attorney-at-law is not involved in those commu- nications. Communications with in-house counsel are only privileged insofar as they relate to the counsel’s role in legal proceedings within the meaning of the Code of Judicial Procedure.
status of a party to the proceedings if the judgment in the case is binding on them as if it had been issued in proceedings in which they were a party (res judicata). If a third party wishes to participate in the proceedings as an intervener, they must submit an application to this effect to the court. The original parties are given an opportunity to be heard on the application. 4.5 Applications for Security for Defendant’s Costs In Finland, it is not possible to apply for an order to require the claimant to pay a sum of money as secu- rity for the defendant’s legal costs (however, see 6.4 Liability for Damages for the Applicant , on security related to precautionary measures). 4.6 Costs of Interim Applications/Motions The legal costs of interim applications are generally considered alongside and under the same principles as the legal costs relating to the main procedure (see 11. Costs , on the general rules and 6.4 Liability for Damages for the Applicant , on costs related to pre- cautionary measures). 4.7 Application/Motion Timeframe The timeframe for an application to be dealt with by the court can vary considerably, ranging from days to months. Precautionary measures, for example, are often issued quickly as they are usually required urgently, whereas non-urgent matters typically take much longer. While a party may request that the court expedite the processing of an application on good grounds, the timeframe of the proceedings is solely at the court’s discretion.
5. Discovery 5.1 Discovery and Civil Cases
Discovery, as it exists in common law jurisdictions, is not part of Finnish procedural law. However, courts may order a party or a third person to produce a docu- ment or object that may be used as evidence. See 5.4 Alternatives to Discovery Mechanisms .
313 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook