FINLAND Trends and Developments Contributed by: Marja Norrena, Maija Ahtiainen, Valmari Keskimäki and Krista Hautakoski, Lieke Attorneys Ltd
A clear emerging trend is the growing interest in shift- ing liability to the giants of the platform economy, for which the introduction of the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act by the EU has provided some tools. For example, cases related to IP infringement are increasingly being brought not only against the infringing party, but also against the platform provid- ers that have enabled the infringement. ESG-Related Litigation In recent years, there has been a notable increase in the regulation of environmental, social and gov- ernance (ESG) matters. This includes both national and EU-level regulation. While we have yet to see a similar wave of ESG litigation in Finland as in some other European countries, we expect this to change as ESG-related issues, such as climate change, become ever more topical. There has also been an emergence of new approaches to providing legal representation in ESG-related matters, including from non-profits, with some new players already entering the market. An interesting example of ESG-related regulation that has already been, and is likely to continue to be, sub- ject to legal proceedings is the Finnish Climate Act, which came into force in 2022. The Act sets out, inter alia, Finland’s emission-reduction targets for years 2030, 2040 and 2050, including the ambitious goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2035. In 2022, environmental organisations brought an appeal against the actions of Finland’s former gov- ernment under the Climate Act. They argued that the government had made an appealable administrative decision regarding the annual climate report, which is required under the Act, by failing to consider addition- al climate measures. According to the appellants, it had become evident that further measures were nec- essary to meet the targets set by the Act. In 2023, the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that neither the issuing of the annual climate report to the Parliament nor the government’s inaction constituted a decision that could be appealed against. A similar appeal was brought again to the Supreme Administrative Court in 2024 by several environmental organisations, which argued, inter alia, that the cur- rent government had not introduced adequate climate
measures necessary to meet Finland’s emission tar- gets. Following the previous appeal, the European Court of Human Rights had given its decision in the case of Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Oth- ers v Switzerland , in which it had emphasised that states have an obligation to take adequate measures to comply with their international commitments. The court also found that it was contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights for there to be no possi- bility of bringing before a court the question of wheth- er the state had failed to take sufficient climate action. This time, the Supreme Administrative Court consid- ered the merits of the appeal but dismissed it again. The ruling stated, inter alia, that it was too early to determine whether further climate measures, which were still under preparation, would later prove inade- quate for meeting upcoming targets of 2030 and 2035. However, the Supreme Administrative Court noted that the outcome of a future appeal could be different if it later becomes evident that the introduced measures are inadequate to meet the targets. It is quite possible that a landmark ruling on the obligations under the Cli- mate Act could emerge in the not-too-distant future. While these cases concerned the actions of the state and not those of private companies, strategic climate litigation against private entities could eventually emerge in Finland. Especially companies operating in industries with a significant environmental impact should be aware of the increasing risk of legal action in future. Streamlining Civil Proceedings Finland has been struggling with the issue of protract- ed civil court proceedings for years. The COVID-19 pandemic further stressed the already overloaded courts as hearings had to be cancelled. The effects are still somewhat evident, although increased resources have since improved the situation slightly. Not only does the protraction of court proceedings delay the resolution of the matter, but also tends to increase the parties’ legal costs. To address the issue, some reforms have been introduced in recent years, and additional measures are currently being considered.
326 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook