Finland
| Author | Klaus Viitanen |
| Published date | 01 March 2009 |
| Date | 01 March 2009 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0002716208328288 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
private mechanisms for collective redress, especially in
consumer affairs, including a Public Consumer Dispute
Board and Consumer Ombudsman. The latter’s powers
have been considerably extended from 2008 with the
(exclusive) ability under the Group Action Act to bring
opt-in collective actions for damages.
Keywords: collective litigation; group action; group
complaints; mass consumer disputes; con-
sumer ombudsman; legal expenses
Finland
1. General
By
1.1. The Finnish civil litigation system
KLAUS VIITANEN
Finland, like the other Nordic countries, has
a civil law system. However, unlike many other
civil law countries, Finland and the other Nordic
countries have not codified their civil law.
Instead of one single civil code, civil law ques-
tions are in these countries regulated by sepa-
rated acts.1
Finland has a dual court system. General
courts deal with civil and criminal law cases and
administrative courts deal with disputes
between private persons and public authorities,
for example, disputes on taxes, social security,
and protection of environment. The procedure
in the general courts is regulated by the Code
of Judicial Procedure, which was radically
reformed in 1993. The current civil procedure
is based on principles of centrality, orality, and
immediacy.2 The procedure is divided into two
stages: written and oral preparation, and the
main hearing. In practice, 95 percent of all
cases are settled during the written preparation
stage. The cost rules were also reformed in
1993. According to the present cost rules, the
Klaus Viitanen is acting senior lecturer in commercial
law in the Department of Private Law, University of
Helsinki, Finland.
DOI: 10.1177/0002716208328288
ANNALS, AAPSS, 622, March 2009
209
210
THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY
loser pays the legal expenses of both parties. This was also the main rule before
the reform, but in practice courts previously approved only approximately 60 per-
cent of the winners’ claim on legal expenses.
1.2. The forms of group litigation in Finland
The forms of group litigation may be divided into two main groups, on the
basis of what kind of remedies are available. In group litigation for injunctions,
the courts are entitled to impose only injunction orders. These procedures are
often called group actions for injunction. The main aim of these actions is to pro-
tect the collective interests and rights of different groups. However, in Finland,
most collective interests and rights are protected by state or municipal authori-
ties. These authorities are entitled to impose injunction orders against natural or
legal persons who have infringed these interests and rights. The most well-known
situations in which authorities have competence to impose injunction orders
without the need to take legal action in a court may be found in competition law,
environmental law, and legislation regulating equality between men and women.
The competence of state authorities is much more limited in the protection of
consumer collective interests, with the exception of product safety issues. In
questions concerning the use of unfair marketing practices or unfair standard
contract terms, the Finnish Consumer Ombudsman may take legal action against
a trader in the Market Court, assuming the Ombudsman has not previously suc-
ceed in persuading the trader to voluntarily abandon the infringement of the law.
The most relevant act in this context is the Consumer Protection Act (34/1978),
adopted in 1978 and amended several times since.3 Other relevant acts are the
Consumer Agency Act (1056/1998), the Market Court Act (1527/2001), and the
Act on Certain Proceedings before the Market Court (1528/2001).
In group litigation for compensation, it is possible to claim monetary compensa-
tion for damages that a certain group of persons have suffered due to the infringe-
ment of their individual rights. This form of group litigation is often called group
action for compensation. Group action for compensation may be nonrepresentative
or representative. In a nonrepresentative group action for compensation, all those
persons who have suffered damage have to be parties to the trial to receive compen-
sation. These kinds of nonrepresentative actions have been traditionally possible in
the Finnish courts on the basis of so-called joint actions and consolidation of actions.
In addition, test and pilot cases are also possible in Finnish courts, although they are
not given any kind of special treatment in the Finnish procedural legislation.
After fifteen years of discussion and debate, the Group Action Act (444/2007)
was finally adopted in February 2007 and entered into force in October 2007.
This act, which is applicable in mass consumer disputes only, provides for the first
time the possibility of a representative group action for compensation. The
Finnish Consumer Ombudsman may in a mass consumer dispute institute legal
action in a general court and represent a specified group of consumers without
express permission from group members. This may result in a judgment that is
binding all the members of the group.
FINLAND
211
Finland also has a system for out-of-court settlement of consumer disputes. At
the municipal level, consumers may receive legal advice from municipal consumer
advisers, who may also try to mediate between the disputing parties. At the state
level, the Public Consumer Dispute Board settles individual consumer disputes by
giving recommendations.4 Since March 2007, the Finnish Consumer Ombudsman
has been entitled to initiate a special group complaint before this Board. If the
Board regards the complaint as justified, it may recommend that the trader in
question give compensation to all consumers who have suffered similar damage.
2. Nonrepresentative Group Action for Compensation
2.1. Consolidation of actions
The settlement of mass disputes is, in principle, possible also in traditional civil
procedure. If several plaintiffs bring claims against the same defendant, the court
may join these actions into one proceeding if that contributes to a quicker and
proper trial of the case5 (consolidation of actions). All the members of the group
who want to have compensation must be involved in the trial as plaintiffs. Where
a consumer organization or another third party represents the members of a
group, it must have a proxy from each of them. In consolidated cases, the loser
has to pay his or her own trial costs and those of the other party.6 This means that
all the members of the group who are plaintiffs in the trial have to bear their part
of the legal expenses if the case is lost.
2.2. Pilot cases
The second alternative in the settlement of mass consumer disputes is the so-
called pilot case. This means that only one case is taken to court,...
To continue reading
Request your trial