Välitystuomion täytäntöönpanon epääminen ordre public -perusteella
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33344/vol19iss1pp46-72Abstrakti
Arbitration is a dispute resolution method that is growing in popularity, particularly in business disputes. One factor contributing to the popularity of arbitration is the wide range of international enforcement options available for arbitration awards, as well as the finality of the award. However, in Finland, a district court can deny enforcement on the grounds of ordre public – what it practically means is in the research agenda of this article. The study finds that ordre public issues are highly open to interpretation and that, for example, legal literature contains partly conflicting views on what kinds of arbitration awards are enforceable. The scarcity of the Supreme Court decisions in Finland does not provide any guidance for interpretation, but as this article demonstrates, European Union law and the decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union play a surprisingly important role in the consideration of enforceability in Finland. Traditionally, EU legal matters and legislative instruments have been kept separate from arbitration proceedings. The article demonstrates a clear need to clarify the issues of jurisdiction. In addition, the article argues that, particularly in competition law matters, the enforcement of an arbitral award may be prevented at a significantly lower threshold – the requirement of obviousness is therefore not applied in the same way in all situations.
