Arbitration in Finland (FAI) — The 2024 Rules Explained for Foreign Companies

With practical guidance for investors and multinationals operating through Dhaka, Dubai, and London

Executive overview

Finland’s Arbitration Institute of the Finland Chamber of Commerce (FAI) has updated its flagship rules effective 1 January 2024. For foreign companies, the 2024 FAI Arbitration Rules matter for three reasons:

1. Speed with structure. FAI remains one of Europe’s most time-efficient institutions, with median durations well under a year in recent caseloads. The 2024 Rules sharpen timelines (e.g., a clarified window to jointly nominate a sole arbitrator) and reduce early procedural friction.
2. Case management that travels well. The Rules align to Model-Law principles, integrate modern best practices (like third-party funding disclosure), and keep party autonomy front and center. That makes them easy to “plug into” cross-border contracting governed by English law or supported by Dubai free-zone courts, while remaining enforceable in Finland and globally under the New York Convention architecture.
3. Cost predictability. A transparent fee schedule (with an updated filing fee and a recalibrated approach to arbitrator and administrative fees) plus an “amount in dispute” determination mechanism discourages tactics that artificially inflate or deflate quantum for fee leverage.

This guide is written for general counsel, CFOs, and deal teams. We explain what changed in 2024, how to draft FAI-ready clauses, what to expect from filing to final award, and—critically—how to line up London and Dubai levers (interim measures, privacy, sanctions, banking) around a Finland-seated arbitration so that your paper rights convert into real-world outcomes.

Want a one-page action plan? Explore our cross-border arbitration resources and speak with our team via tahmidurrahman.com.

Why foreign companies should care about FAI

Finland’s arbitration profile in three lines

• Predictable, neutral seat with courts supportive of arbitration (Model-Law-style DNA and a pro-enforcement stance).
• Institutional maturity: FAI has administered both domestic and international cases for decades, with expedited rules available for smaller or time-sensitive disputes.
• Process discipline that keeps counsel focused on merits: tight filings, clear appointment mechanics, and pragmatic administration.

Where FAI fits in a global contract stack (Dhaka • Dubai • London)

• London: Many cross-border deals prefer English law and LCIA/ICC seats. But where supply chains, vendors, or counterparties are Nordic/Baltic, an FAI seat can reduce friction and increase cooperation while retaining first-class enforceability worldwide.
• Dubai: If your treasury or IP holding sits in DIFC/ADGM or you bank through the UAE, you can still deploy FAI as the arbitral forum while using UAE courts (especially the common-law free-zone courts) for supportive interim measures over UAE assets.
• Bangladesh: For Bangladesh-based operations with European counterparties, FAI provides a neutral European venue without London’s sometimes heavier disclosure culture, while keeping awards portable under the New York Convention.

What’s new in the 2024 FAI Arbitration Rules (and why it matters)

The 2024 update refines a well-running machine. The highlights below translate legal text into operational impact for companies.

1) A clearer model arbitration clause (with adjustable levers)

FAI publishes a model clause that you can lift into your contracts. Crucially, the clause invites the parties to pre-set:

• Number of arbitrators (one or three),
• Seat (town/country), and
• Language.

Why it matters: You remove 80% of first-month procedural wrangling by fixing these at deal-time. For cross-border stacks we often recommend: English language, three arbitrators for high-value or technical disputes, and a carefully chosen seat (Finland, or London for certain profiles—see “Seat” section).

2) Starting an arbitration: what your Request must include

A complete Request for Arbitration contains contact details (parties/counsel), the arbitration agreement, the core contract(s), a brief description of the dispute, relief sought with quantified amounts (or best estimates), views on the seat/law/language, nomination of an arbitrator (if a three-member tribunal is contractually required), any note on whether Expedited Rules might be more appropriate, and proof of the filing fee.

Why it matters: FAI expects substantive early precision. For in-house teams, that means finance and commercial must help counsel assemble a clean quantum estimate before filing. It not only accelerates case management but also protects your costs position later.

3) Filing fee and costs: refreshed, transparent, predictable

The 2024 Rules fix a filing fee (payable by claimant and also by a respondent who brings a counterclaim or set-off claim). The fee is non-refundable. Administrative and arbitrator fees have been moderately increased to reflect recent inflation.

Why it matters:

• Budgeting is clearer.
• The “amount in dispute” drives the fee curve; the Institute can determine quantum if one side games the numbers—curbing bad-faith fee manipulation.
• You can pre-model expected fees at various quantum bands and choose whether to actively push consolidation of claims or keep them segmented.

4) The “amount in dispute” mechanism

If the overall quantum is unclear (or appears contrived), FAI may fix the amount in dispute “taking into account all relevant circumstances.” It can also step in for “exceptional circumstances.”

Why it matters: This deters “low-balling” quantum to chase a lower fee band or, conversely, “headline inflation” to force a heavy tribunal. As claimant, prepare supporting schedules early (PO/Invoices, pricing mechanics, change orders). As respondent, maintain counter-schedules to challenge speculative figures without over-pleading.

5) Ten additional days for joint nomination of a sole arbitrator

The 2024 Rules give parties a 10-day window after the Answer reaches the claimant to agree a sole arbitrator.

Why it matters: Parties no longer need to nominate “blind.” That small timing fix encourages consensual appointments, reducing default-appointment scenarios and early mistrust.

6) Third-party funding disclosure

New Article 21.5 obliges parties to disclose existence and identity of any funder with an economic interest in the outcome.

Why it matters:

• Transparency allows conflict checks and protects the award against later challenge for undisclosed relationships.
• Respondents can meaningfully argue security for costs when funding is present; claimants can plan for that.

7) Expedited option remains available

FAI continues to provide a dedicated Expedited Rules track for disputes where speed and proportionality matter. Parties can stipulate expedited arbitration at contract stage or invite the Institute to consider it once a dispute arises.

Why it matters: For supply chains, SaaS/service credits, and short-cycle distribution relationships, expedited proceedings are often the best-value forum—if the drafting is clear.

Drafting an FAI-ready clause that actually protects you

The must-haves (and why)

1. Seat of arbitration

• Finland (Helsinki): neutral, supportive courts; balanced approach to procedure.
• London: if you need robust interim relief (freezing orders, disclosure) or your deal architecture is English-law heavy.
• ADGM/DIFC as supporting fora: not your seat, but court support for UAE assets (recognition and assistance) can be vital.

1. Governing law

• English law remains the gold standard for international commercial contracts (predictability, mature jurisprudence).
• Local Finnish law when the commercial center of gravity is purely Nordic and parties desire alignment with local mandatory rules.

1. Rules

• “Arbitration Rules of the Finland Chamber of Commerce” (2024 version). For certain deal types, add a fallback: if specific criteria (e.g., sub-€X claim value) are met, the Expedited Rules apply.

1. Number of arbitrators

• One for lower-value or low-complexity; three for high-value, technical, or reputational matters. Pre-define the threshold to avoid fights.

1. Language

• English in most cross-border deals. Confirm translation responsibilities and the status of bilingual exhibits.

1. Ethics-by-design

• Add a short good-faith clause (“the parties shall do all things necessary in good faith for the fair, efficient and expeditious conduct of the arbitration”).
• Ban ex parte communications with arbitrators (administrative communications to be promptly disclosed).
• Affirm witness independence and no outcome-based compensation for factual witnesses.

1. Evidence and confidentiality

• Incorporate a confidentiality order and a privilege protocol (we typically propose UK-style privilege definitions to protect in-house counsel communications for groups operating through London).
• Add a cybersecurity & data-handling protocol (multi-factor authentication, approved repositories, watermarked bundles, no public AI uploads).

1. Funding and security for costs

• Mirror the FAI funding disclosure in the clause, and confirm tribunal power to order security for costs.

1. Interim measures

• Expressly permit applications to national courts (Finland/London/UAE) for urgent relief without waiving arbitration.
• If UAE assets may be targeted, expressly reference ADGM/DIFC support where compatible.

1. Consolidation/joinder planning
   • If your deal structure is multi-contract/multi-party, insert joinder and consolidation mechanics to avoid fragmented proceedings.

Template packs and clause libraries: TRW maintains FAI-tuned, sector-specific clause sets and PO-1 starters. See our overview at tahmidurrahman.com.

From Request to Award: the FAI lifecycle (what to expect)

1) Pre-filing

• Evidence map: contracts, POs, delivery notes, inspection logs, change orders, pricing calculations, notice trail.
• Quantum schedules: base claim, alternatives, and counter-estimates; identify interest and currency issues.
• Funding: if using a funder, line up disclosure, ATE insurance, and anticipate security for costs.

2) Filing the Request for Arbitration

• Include all elements listed under the Rules (see above).
• Pay the filing fee and be prepared to nominate your appointed arbitrator (if a three-member tribunal is required).
• Consider inviting FAI to apply the Expedited Rules, if proportionate.

3) Answer and early appointment issues

• The respondent’s Answer arrives. Now, under the 2024 tweak, the parties have a 10-day period to jointly nominate a sole arbitrator with the benefit of both sides’ pleadings.
• If agreement fails, the Institute will appoint.

4) Procedural Order No. 1 (PO-1)

• This is where you lock the rails:
• Ethics & conduct (good faith, no ex parte),
• Privilege protocol,
• Confidentiality & cyber rules,
• Document production (custodians, search terms, formats, timelines),
• Expert protocols (instruction letters disclosed; independence standards),
• Funding disclosure confirmations.
• A good PO-1 reduces 70% of avoidable motion practice.

5) Document production and witness/expert phases

• Consider adopting IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence by agreement to streamline requests and objections.
• Prepare witness statements with clear factual foundations; avoid over-lawyered narratives.
• Experts: choose independent specialists; align instructions with the tribunal’s issues list; disclose reliance materials.

6) Hearings (physical, hybrid, or remote)

• Early hearing logistics plan: interpreters, video, time-zones (Dhaka/Dubai/London/Helsinki), document presentation software, confidentiality safeguards.
• Remember UAE PDPL and UK GDPR impacts if data flows through Dubai or London infrastructure—mirror into the PO-1 data appendix.

7) Post-hearing briefs and award

• Expect a reasoned, written award unless parties have agreed otherwise.
• Costs and interest: marshal a costs narrative that quantifies the impact of the other side’s procedural conduct (delays, failed applications).

Choosing the seat: Finland vs London (and UAE court support)

Finland as seat

Pros: neutral European forum; efficient timetable; “light-touch” discovery culture; supportive courts.
Use when: counterparties or performance are Nordic/Baltic; you want speed without heavy disclosure; you value a strong institutional case manager with pragmatic timelines.

London as seat

Pros: formidable interim remedies (freezing orders, Norwich Pharmacal/Bankers Trust disclosure), sophisticated arbitration bench, deep jurisprudence.
Use when: asset-protection pressure is key; contracts are already English-law heavy; upstream financing and security packages are London-centric.

UAE support (ADGM/DIFC)

Not a seat alternative in an FAI clause, but a support ecosystem for recognition and interim measures over UAE-sited assets. The common-law free-zone courts are arbitration-friendly and operate in English.

TRW view: Pick a seat based on asset geography and remedy speed, not branding. You can still administer under FAI with London or Helsinki as seat; then plan parallel assistance in Dubai or Dhaka (as needed) for asset-level steps.

Costs strategy under the 2024 Rules

1. Model the curve. Use fee tables and cost calculators to pre-model fees at multiple amount-in-dispute scenarios.
2. Don’t game quantum. The Institute can fix the figure if you get too clever. Instead, provide a transparent basis with exhibits.
3. Right-size the tribunal. One arbitrator for lower-value cases can be significantly cheaper; set a threshold in the clause.
4. Expedited track when fair. Time is money. Where appropriate, opt in.
5. Costs submissions that count. Keep a running log of opponent’s dilatory steps. Turn that into a calibrated costs ask at the end.

Third-party funding: disclosure, conflicts, and security for costs

• Disclosure is mandatory under the 2024 Rules: existence/identity of the funder.
• Tribunals may more readily entertain security for costs if funding exists and the claimant’s solvency is unclear.
• Use ATE insurance to blunt security demands.
• Always run sanctions/AML checks on funders and payment routes (especially where UAE banks or UK correspondent banks are involved).

Data, privacy, and cybersecurity when your documents live in three places

• Map data across Dhaka–Dubai–London–Helsinki: where do bundles sit? who can access?
• Adopt a data processing appendix in PO-1 with approved platforms, regional hosting, MFA, watermarking, and download controls.
• Prohibit uploading case materials into public AI tools; if AI is used internally for formatting or summarization, require human validation and source attachment to every AI-assisted output.
• If HR or consumer data is in play, mirror UK GDPR and UAE PDPL into your arbitration confidentiality order.

Sector snapshots: what foreign companies should watch for under FAI

Energy & infrastructure

• Change-in-law clauses and extension of time/LD mechanics should be drafted with Finnish seat enforceability in mind.
• Keep as-built records contemporaneous; appoint neutral delay experts early.

Manufacturing & distribution

• Clarify inspection/acceptance tests, non-conformity notice windows, and liquidated damages.
• Borderline discovery means you must keep clean QC logs and chain-of-custody.

Technology / SaaS

• Data transfers and IP license scope are the usual flashpoints—align your Finnish seat arbitration with UK/UAE privacy compliance if servers or administrators sit there.
• Define service credits and technical evidence protocols (server logs, snapshots) in the contract.

Financial services & trade finance

• Harmonize ISDA/CSA or LMA frameworks with FAI procedure; define expert evidence on valuation/close-out.
• If accounts or receivables sit in the UAE, plan ADGM/DIFC steps in parallel to FAI case milestones.

Ethics, fairness, and tribunal confidence (your hidden leverage)

FAI’s process culture rewards good-faith conduct and clean records. That’s your leverage. Bake into PO-1: no ex parte, transparent expert instructions, privilege guardrails, and a cyber standard. Tribunals reciprocate by moving efficiently and treating your evidence as reliable—which improves settlement gravity.

The first 90 days: TRW’s operational playbook

Days 1–15 — Frame the battlefield

• Finalize seat, rules, language, tribunal size if open.
• Deliver the PO-1 draft (ethics, privilege, confidentiality, cyber, data).
• Build quantum schedules with CFO input; collect ledgers and delivery evidence.

Days 16–45 — Lock procedures & evidence

• Agree PO-1; appoint tribunal.
• Spin up a secure document repository; designate e-discovery liaisons.
• Prepare witness shortlists and expert TORs; issue funding disclosure (if any).

Days 46–90 — Merits momentum

• Exchange document requests/production; run interviews and draft witness statements.
• Set hearing windows and logistics (time zones, interpreters, video).
• Prepare interim relief strategies for assets in Finland/UAE/UK if needed.

Outcome: You will be merits-forward, procedure-secure, and enforcement-ready.

FAQs (from foreign corporates using FAI)

Is FAI only for Finnish law disputes?
No. Parties routinely choose non-Finnish governing law and still arbitrate under FAI Rules with a Finland seat (or even a different seat if agreed). The Rules are designed for international use.

Will I face heavy discovery like in some London cases?
Typically, no. Discovery remains focused and proportionate—another reason some parties prefer FAI when speed and confidentiality are paramount. If you want standardized evidence practice, the tribunal can adopt IBA Rules by party agreement.

Can I still seek urgent court orders if the arbitration is under FAI?
Yes. The clause and PO-1 should preserve court recourse for urgent interim measures. If assets are in Dubai or London, we structure ADGM/DIFC/English court routes to complement the FAI case.

How do costs compare with ICC or LCIA?
Different scales and methodologies apply, but FAI’s transparent schedules and median durations often translate to competitive total cost of ownership—especially when you select a sole arbitrator or Expedited Rules for proportionate disputes.

Does third-party funding disclosure hurt my case?
Disclosure is about conflicts and transparency; tribunals look at merits. If solvency is raised, ATE or security for costs arrangements can balance the equation.

TRW’s value if your contracts or disputes touch Finland

• One team across Dhaka, Dubai, London: strategy, drafting, and enforcement run as a single project.
• Clause and PO-1 libraries tuned for FAI, with ethics, privilege, and cyber baked in.
• Interim relief choreography in English and UAE courts when assets need quick protection.
• Costs discipline: we design case plans to win on the merits and in the costs phase.
• Enforcement roadmaps: award conversion and execution where the money is—bank accounts, receivables, inventory, real property.

Explore how we structure FAI-ready contracts and run cross-border arbitrations at tahmidurrahman.com.

Structured summary table — 2024 FAI Arbitration Rules for foreign companies

Topic	What changed / key point	Why it matters to you	TRW action
Model clause	Clear template; parties can preset number, seat, language	Reduces month-1 fights; aligns with global templates	Insert FAI model with our ethics, privilege & cyber riders
Request contents	Detailed early disclosure of claims, value, and proposals	Drives faster, cleaner case management	Build quantified schedules and a merits-first narrative
Filing fee & costs	Non-refundable filing fee; updated schedules for admin/arbitrator fees	Predictable budgeting; deters fee gaming	Pre-model cost scenarios; choose sole vs three arbitrators strategically
Amount in dispute	Institute may fix quantum if unclear or contrived	Discourages inflation/deflation tactics	Prepare evidential support; challenge speculative figures
Sole arbitrator timing	+10 days to agree after Answer reaches claimant	Informed, consensual appointments more likely	Identify neutral candidates and agree quickly
Third-party funding	Mandatory disclosure of existence/identity	Conflict hygiene; security for costs dynamics	Manage funder relations, ATE coverage, and AML screening
Expedited track	Continued availability under separate rules	Time/cost proportionality for mid-tier disputes	Hardwire expedited triggers into your clause
Seat choice	Finland (neutral/efficient) vs London (powerful court tools)	Remedy speed & asset geography drive selection	Seat-by-asset mapping; parallel UAE/UK court support
Ethics & conduct	Good-faith, no ex parte, witness & expert integrity best practices	Improves tribunal trust and settlement gravity	Lock into PO-1; maintain an “ethics file” throughout
Evidence & confidentiality	Tailored production; privilege, data, and cyber protocols	Protects IP/PII; avoids satellite fights	UK-style privilege protocol; GDPR/PDPL parity in PO-1
Interim measures	Court recourse preserved; coordinate across fora	Protects receivables and bank accounts	Orchestrate ADGM/DIFC or English orders alongside FAI
Enforcement	Portable awards via NYC architecture	Turn paper wins into cash	Build execution playbooks where assets sit

Contact TRW — Bangladesh • Dubai • London

Phone: +8801708000660 | +8801847220062 | +8801708080817
Email: [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected]

Dhaka (Head Office): House 410, Road 29, Mohakhali DOHS, Dhaka
Dubai: Rolex Building, L-12, Sheikh Zayed Road, Dubai
London: 330 High Holborn, London WC1V 7QH, United Kingdom

Start with a Risk & Action Map for your Finland-touching contracts or disputes. We’ll calibrate your FAI clauses, PO-1, evidence plan, and enforcement corridors so your rights are not just well-drafted, but bankable.