Finnish Arbitration Act Reform 2026, a Practical Guide for Businesses and Litigators

Last reviewed: 2 May 2026

The Finnish Arbitration Act reform 2026 represents the most consequential overhaul of Finland’s arbitration framework in decades. Triggered by a Ministry of Justice working group report published on 18 December 2025, the proposed new Act would replace the existing statute entirely and align Finnish arbitration law with the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. For in-house counsel, external litigators and commercial contracts teams, the reform demands immediate attention, from drafting new arbitration clauses and understanding expanded tribunal powers over interim measures, to navigating a recalibrated enforcement regime for both domestic and foreign arbitral awards. This guide converts the reform proposals into actionable steps: sample clauses, tactical checklists and a timed “what to do now” roadmap.

Key Takeaways

• Full replacement, not amendment. The working group proposes replacing the current Finnish Arbitration Act with an entirely new statute modelled on the UNCITRAL Model Law, introducing form-free arbitration agreements, explicit tribunal powers over interim measures, and provisions for emergency arbitration.
• Draft clauses now. Existing arbitration clauses in contracts with Finnish counterparties may need updating to take advantage of new tribunal interim-measure powers, emergency arbitrator mechanisms and a modernised enforcement framework.
• Timeline is tight. The Ministry of Justice has indicated the new law is intended to enter into force approximately six months after parliamentary adoption. Industry observers expect contracting teams should begin clause reviews immediately to avoid gaps in dispute-resolution protection during the transition.

Background: Why Finland Is Reforming Its Arbitration Law

Finland’s current Arbitration Act has remained largely unchanged since its enactment, having undergone only five limited amendments, primarily in connection with changes to other laws. While Finnish courts have historically granted deference to arbitration agreements and provided swift assistance to arbitral proceedings, the statutory framework has increasingly fallen behind international best practice. On 18 December 2025, the Finnish Ministry of Justice published a working group report proposing comprehensive reform, with the stated aim of promoting the competitiveness of arbitration in Finland and harmonising domestic legislation with the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration.

The public consultation on the draft proposal launched on the same date. Industry observers expect this Finland arbitration reform to reposition Helsinki as a more attractive seat for cross-border disputes, particularly in the Nordic and Baltic regions. For practitioners, the shift from a sparse domestic statute to a Model Law-aligned framework changes the playbook on everything from clause drafting to local court intervention in international arbitration.

Key Changes Proposed by the Finnish Arbitration Act Reform 2026, Practitioner Impact

The proposed Finnish arbitration law 2026 introduces six clusters of change that directly affect how practitioners draft, argue and enforce. Below is a breakdown of each cluster, along with the immediate practical step counsel should take.

Arbitration Agreement, Form and Governing Law

The reform adds clarity on form-free arbitration agreements, removing the strict written-form requirement. Under the proposed rules, an arbitration agreement may be concluded orally, by conduct, or through electronic communications, mirroring the approach taken in most UNCITRAL Model Law jurisdictions. The draft also introduces provisions on the law governing the arbitration agreement, filling a gap that has generated uncertainty in cross-border contracts.

• Practical step: Review template agreements to ensure arbitration clauses expressly specify the governing law of the arbitration agreement (not just the substantive governing law of the contract). This avoids disputes over validity where the seat, governing law and counterparty jurisdictions diverge.

Tribunal Jurisdiction and Competence-Competence

The new Act would codify the competence-competence principle, giving the tribunal express authority to rule on its own jurisdiction. Importantly, the draft allows a party to seek judicial review of a positive jurisdictional decision within a defined time frame of 30 days from the ruling. This aligns Finland with the approach in jurisdictions such as Sweden, Singapore and Hong Kong.

• Practical step: Calendar the 30-day window immediately upon receipt of any jurisdictional ruling. Failure to challenge within this period is expected to preclude later objections at the enforcement stage.

Tribunal Power to Order Interim Measures

This is among the most significant changes for commercial litigators. The arbitral tribunal will be given explicit statutory power to order interim measures under the reform. Currently, the Act is silent on tribunal-ordered interim relief, forcing parties to rely on institutional rules or seek protective measures from Finnish courts. The proposed framework requires court confirmation for enforcement of tribunal-ordered measures, which aligns Finland with other Model Law jurisdictions.

• Practical step: Draft arbitration clauses that explicitly authorise tribunal interim measures and consent to court enforcement. See the sample clauses in Section 3 below.

Emergency Arbitration, Statutory Recognition

Under the current system, emergency arbitration in Finland operates solely under institutional rules, notably those of the Finland Arbitration Institute (FAI). A party needing urgent interim measures before the tribunal is constituted may apply to the FAI for appointment of an emergency arbitrator. The reform would give statutory backing to emergency arbitrator decisions, closing the enforceability gap that currently exists when the other party resists compliance.

• Practical step: Include explicit emergency arbitration language in new contracts. For existing contracts that reference FAI rules, confirm that the applicable version of those rules includes emergency arbitrator provisions.

Electronic Hearings and Procedural Modernisation

The draft proposal introduces express provisions permitting electronic hearings and digital case management, reflecting post-pandemic practice in international arbitration. While most institutions and tribunals have already adopted these practices informally, statutory authorisation removes residual challenges to awards based on procedural irregularity arguments.

• Practical step: Consider adding a “hybrid hearing” clause to arbitration agreements, specifying that hearings may be conducted remotely unless the tribunal orders otherwise.

Court Assistance, Review and the Appeals Window

The reform recalibrates the relationship between Finnish courts and arbitral tribunals. Courts will retain the authority to assist arbitral proceedings, for example, by ordering evidence preservation or witness attendance, while the new 30-day judicial review mechanism for jurisdictional challenges provides a structured, time-limited check on tribunal authority. Finnish courts are expected to continue granting deference to arbitration agreements under the reformed framework.

• Practical step: Map each contract’s dispute resolution mechanism to identify where court assistance may be needed and draft consent provisions accordingly.

Drafting Arbitration Clauses Under the Finland Arbitration Reform, Templates and Red Flags

The single most important action for contracts teams in response to the Finnish Arbitration Act reform 2026 is to review and, where necessary, rewrite arbitration clauses in both new and existing agreements. Below are three sample clause templates adapted for the proposed framework, together with a triage checklist for prioritising contract review.

Template 1, Model Arbitration Clause (Commercial Contracts)

Adapted for use with the Finland Arbitration Institute (FAI) under the proposed new Act:

“Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this contract, or the breach, termination or validity thereof, shall be finally settled by arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the Finland Arbitration Institute. The seat of arbitration shall be Helsinki, Finland. The language of the arbitration shall be English. The arbitral tribunal shall consist of [one / three] arbitrator(s). The arbitral tribunal shall have the power to grant interim measures of protection as provided for under the Finnish Arbitration Act and the applicable Rules. The parties consent to the enforcement of any interim measures by the competent Finnish court.”

Template 2, Emergency Arbitration Clause

For contracts requiring pre-tribunal urgent relief under FAI rules:

“A party requiring urgent interim measures that cannot await the constitution of the arbitral tribunal may apply for the appointment of an emergency arbitrator in accordance with the applicable rules of the Finland Arbitration Institute. Any decision or order of the emergency arbitrator shall be binding on both parties and enforceable in accordance with the Finnish Arbitration Act. The parties expressly waive any right to challenge the enforceability of an emergency arbitrator’s decision on the grounds that the arbitral tribunal had not yet been constituted.”

Template 3, Interim Relief and Court Assistance Clause

Preserving parties’ access to both tribunal and court measures:

“Nothing in this arbitration agreement shall prevent either party from seeking interim or conservatory measures from any court of competent jurisdiction before or during the arbitral proceedings. A request for such measures shall not be deemed incompatible with the agreement to arbitrate. The parties agree that the arbitral tribunal may also order interim measures, including but not limited to preservation of assets, maintenance of the status quo and anti-suit injunctions, subject to court confirmation for enforcement purposes.”

Seat, Venue and Governing Law, Drafting Tips

Contracting teams frequently conflate the seat of arbitration (the legal jurisdiction governing the arbitral proceedings), the venue (the physical or virtual location of hearings) and the governing law of the contract. Under the Finnish arbitration reform, precision matters more than ever:

• Seat: Always specify “Helsinki, Finland” (or another Finnish city) if you intend Finnish arbitration law to govern procedural matters. The seat determines court supervisory jurisdiction.
• Governing law of the arbitration agreement: Specify this separately from the substantive governing law of the contract. The new Act addresses this issue, but an express choice eliminates ambiguity.
• Institution vs. ad hoc: Name the arbitral institution and the version of rules applicable. If using FAI rules, confirm the edition includes emergency arbitrator provisions.
• Language: Specify the language of arbitration to prevent procedural delay.

Contract Review Triage Checklist

Use this priority matrix when deciding which existing contracts to review first:

• High priority: Contracts with Finnish counterparties or a Finnish seat that contain no arbitration clause, a pathological clause, or a clause that does not address interim measures or emergency arbitration.
• Medium priority: Contracts with a Finnish seat and an institutional clause that references an older edition of institutional rules (pre-emergency arbitrator provisions).
• Lower priority: Contracts with a non-Finnish seat but a Finnish governing law, the reform’s procedural changes are less directly relevant, but enforcement provisions may still apply.
• Immediate action: Any contract entering negotiation now should incorporate the updated clause templates above. For a broader view, see our guide to updating commercial contracts in Finland in 2026.

Interim Measures, Emergency Arbitration and Urgent Relief, A Tactical Playbook

Securing urgent protective measures is one of the areas most significantly affected by the Finnish Arbitration Act reform 2026. The proposed framework introduces a dual-track system: tribunal-ordered interim measures (with court confirmation for enforcement) and continued access to court-ordered interim relief. For emergency situations before the tribunal is constituted, the FAI’s emergency arbitration procedure, now with statutory recognition, provides a third option.

Tribunal-Ordered Interim Measures, How to Obtain Them

Under the proposed Act, a party may request interim measures from the arbitral tribunal at any time after its constitution. The likely practical effect will be that the tribunal can order preservation of assets, maintenance of the status quo, or measures to prevent irreparable harm. To enforce the order against a non-compliant party, the requesting party must apply for court confirmation through the competent Finnish district court.

• Timing: Apply as soon as the tribunal is constituted, delay weakens the urgency argument.
• Evidence: Present a prima facie case on the merits, evidence of imminent harm and evidence that the balance of convenience favours the measure.
• Drafting: Ensure the arbitration clause explicitly authorises interim measures (see Template 1 above).

Emergency Arbitrator, Appointment and Enforcement

Where the matter is too urgent to await tribunal constitution, a party may apply to the Finland Arbitration Institute for appointment of an emergency arbitrator. The FAI’s rules already provide this mechanism, but the reform will give the emergency arbitrator’s decision statutory force. Early indications suggest this will substantially reduce the risk of non-compliance, as Finnish courts will be able to enforce emergency orders in the same manner as tribunal-ordered measures.

• When to use: Asset dissipation risk, destruction of evidence, or breach of non-compete obligations where hours matter.
• Procedure: File a written application with the FAI; an emergency arbitrator is typically appointed within days.
• Enforceability: Under the reform, obtain court confirmation for enforcement in the same way as a tribunal-ordered measure.

Decision Tree, Court Measures vs. Tribunal Measures

Emergency Application Checklist

• Identify the FAI’s emergency arbitration provisions and confirm they apply to your contract.
• Prepare a written application setting out the relief sought, the factual basis, the legal basis and the urgency.
• Include evidence of irreparable harm if the measure is not granted.
• File simultaneously with notice to the opposing party (ex parte relief is exceptional).
• Budget for the emergency arbitrator’s fee and any court-confirmation costs.
• Prepare a court-confirmation application in parallel for immediate filing if the counterparty does not comply voluntarily.

Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Finland Under the Reform

The enforcement of arbitral awards in Finland, both domestic and foreign, is set for a significant update under the proposed new Act. The reform preserves Finland’s commitment to the 1958 New York Convention while introducing a modernised domestic enforcement procedure aligned with the UNCITRAL Model Law. For practitioners handling international arbitration and dispute resolution, the changes bring Finland’s enforcement framework into closer alignment with the jurisdictions most commonly chosen as arbitral seats.

Domestic Enforcement, What Changes?

Under the current regime, enforcement of domestic arbitral awards follows a relatively straightforward application to the competent district court. The reform is expected to maintain this streamlined approach while codifying the limited grounds for refusal of enforcement, mirroring Article 36 of the UNCITRAL Model Law. These grounds include incapacity of a party, invalid arbitration agreement, procedural irregularity, excess of tribunal authority, and conflict with Finnish public policy.

New York Convention Enforcement in Finnish Courts

Finland is a signatory to the New York Convention, and the reform does not alter this commitment. Foreign arbitral awards will continue to be enforceable through Finnish courts under the Convention’s recognition framework. The practical effect of the reform is to align the domestic grounds for refusal with the Convention’s Article V grounds, creating a single, coherent set of objection categories regardless of whether the award is domestic or foreign.

Practical Pitfalls

• Jurisdictional objections: If a party fails to challenge a positive jurisdictional ruling within the proposed 30-day window, industry observers expect that Finnish courts will be reluctant to entertain the same objection at the enforcement stage.
• Public policy: The public policy ground remains available but is narrowly construed. Finnish courts have historically applied this exception restrictively.
• Arbitrability: Ensure the subject matter of the dispute is arbitrable under Finnish law. Certain consumer and employment disputes may remain non-arbitrable.

Six-Step Enforcement Checklist, Foreign Awards in Finland

1. Obtain a certified copy of the arbitral award and the arbitration agreement.
2. Arrange for certified translation into Finnish or Swedish if the award is in another language.
3. File an enforcement application with the competent Finnish district court.
4. Serve the application on the respondent and prepare for any objections based on Article V / Model Law grounds.
5. Respond to any jurisdictional, procedural or public-policy objections raised.
6. Obtain the enforcement order and proceed with execution through the Finnish enforcement authority (ulosottovirasto).

For a deeper discussion of how Finnish courts interact with arbitral proceedings, see our guide on preparation for and conduct of arbitration hearings.

Transitional Rules, Timing and What to Do Now

The Ministry of Justice has indicated that the new Act is intended to enter into force approximately six months after it is adopted and confirmed by Parliament. The final enactment date remains subject to the parliamentary process. The working group report and draft proposal were both published and sent out for public consultation on 18 December 2025.

If you only do one thing: begin a clause-by-clause review of your highest-value contracts with Finnish counterparties or a Finnish seat. Identify whether they address tribunal interim measures, emergency arbitration and the governing law of the arbitration agreement. Contracts that are silent on these points should be prioritised for amendment or side-letter updates. For broader contract-review guidance, refer to our resource on international commercial law.

Finnish Arbitration Act Reform 2026, Quick Checklist and Recommended Next Steps

The Finnish Arbitration Act reform 2026 is not merely a legislative modernisation exercise, it changes the tactical landscape for every contract that designates Finland as the seat of arbitration or involves Finnish counterparties. To stay ahead of the transition, counsel and contracts teams should prioritise these five actions:

1. Audit existing arbitration clauses in all contracts with a Finnish seat or Finnish counterparties using the triage checklist above.
2. Adopt the updated model clauses (Templates 1–3) in all new agreements, expressly addressing tribunal interim measures, emergency arbitration and court-assistance consent.
3. Brief litigation teams on the 30-day judicial review window for jurisdictional challenges and the new dual-track interim-measures framework.
4. Monitor the parliamentary timeline and set calendar alerts for the expected entry-into-force date.
5. Review enforcement procedures for pending and anticipated awards to ensure compliance with the modernised domestic and New York Convention framework.

Sources

1. Finnish Ministry of Justice / OKM, Proposal for a New Arbitration Act
2. Oikeusministeriö, Proposal for a New Arbitration Act (Finnish Ministry of Justice)
3. Finland Arbitration Institute, Working Group Report Published
4. Finland Arbitration Institute, Emergency Arbitration
5. UNCITRAL, Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration
6. DLA Piper, Finnish Arbitration Act Is Being Reformed
7. Waselius, Finland’s Reform of the Arbitration Act: Working Group Proposal
8. HPP Attorneys, Reforming the Finnish Arbitration Act
9. EDILEX, The Finnish Arbitration Act (Commentary)
10. Jus Mundi, Finland (2026) Arbitration Guide