28.8.2014

A Well-Functioning Shareholders’ Agreement for a Startup 1/2

One of the key issues in running and maintaining a successful business is to minimise legal risks, also known as unnecessary expenses. Things do not always go as in the movies, but sometimes they do – unfortunately: we all remember what happened in ‘The Social Network’, and nobody wants to experience the same, right?

A shareholders’ agreement (SHA) is an agreement between the shareholders of a company. It is one of the most important ways to avoid trouble in the future. Briefly put, the SHA defines how the company is run by the shareholders and the board of directors, what kind of consents are required in decision-making, and how the shareholders may deal with their shares. Together with the Companies Act and the articles of association, the SHA forms the legal spine of the company.

When starting a company, the parties are all dazzled with excitement, 100% sure that their startup will shake the market and confident that all the founders are motivated and will be working as hard as possible to succeed. However, the first steps in the life span of a startup may be difficult. There is no money coming in, and uncertainty about breakthrough may create dissent or cause some of the shareholders to lose their interest in the whole project. Under these circumstances, it is very important that each of the shareholders is aware of what is in question in the business, what will happen when certain events occur and what is expected from each shareholder.

In our blog post, we will list the most important issues that should be taken into consideration and clearly specified in the SHA. In the first part, we will concentrate on two topics: specifying the roles of the parties and protecting intellectual property rights. In a later post, we will go through three other vital concerns.

Administration and Roles of the Parties

Primarily, the SHA should define the objectives and roles of the parties so that each of the shareholders has a comprehensive idea of its own roles, duties and responsibilities, as well as those of the other parties. This is essential especially in the case of startups, which typically have only a few shareholders who are all tightly involved in managing and running the business.

The purpose of the SHA is to control the decision-making, especially when investors enter the picture. In the beginning, the company often needs to reform its practices, strategies and operation models along the way. Here, agility is key: it is not possible or indeed advisable to bind the company to a fixed long-term plan that cannot be improved if needed. If you are the founder – which probably means you are also the majority shareholder – you want to make sure that all the decisions that need to be made in the company actually get made, whether they are about nominating the board members, raising money or selling the business. However, the parties may have quite diverse objectives and opinions about these issues. In addition, investors also want to have a say in these matters.

The SHA must be prepared carefully. It should give reasonable rights to all parties but keep you in control of the crucial matters. It should specify particulars, such as the number of board members, how new board members may be nominated, the voting system and possible observer rights to investors that are not represented in the board. Furthermore, the SHA should include a list of reserved matters, which can only be decided by a qualified majority or with the prior written consent of one or several shareholders. Reserved matters include amendments of the articles of association, issues of equity securities and other important decisions.

Protecting Intellectual Property Rights and Know-How

The SHA must include a provision ensuring that all the intellectual property rights (IPRs) as well as all technical capabilities, expertise and know-how which have arisen or will arise later in conjunction with the business of the company remain its exclusive property. If a shareholder enters into the SHA with some IPRs of their own, the SHA should state that in certain cases these rights must also be vested in the company as the absolute legal owner and beneficiary. This is particularly true when such IPRs are related to the preparation of the startup.

Having exclusive rights to its intellectual property is highly important for your startup for multiple reasons. For example, for many startups the IPRs may be the only valuable property, which makes them crucial for both the company and the investors.

In the next part of this blog post, we will tell you more about getting prepared for leaver situations, restricting transfer of shares and other essential provisions that should be included in the SHA.

Tuomas Honkinen  

Latest references

We advised Lantmännen ek för in its contemplated acquisition of Leipurin from Aspo Plc. Lantmännen is an agricultural cooperative and Northern Europe’s leader in agriculture, machinery, bioenergy and food products. Lantmännen is owned by 17,000 Swedish farmers and has 12,000 employees in over 20 countries. Leipurin is a leading Nordic supplier of bakery ingredients, equipment, and expert services to professional bakeries, confectioneries, and food manufacturers. The company operates across Finland, Sweden, and the Baltic countries with subsidiaries located in the aforementioned countries, providing comprehensive solutions to the baking industry. The closing of the transaction remains subject to regulatory approvals.
Case published 25.8.2025
We assisted Oomi Oy in its expansion into the mobile telecommunications market with the launch of Oomi Mobiili, a new MVNO brand. Our work covered the preceding due diligence process as well as structuring and negotiating key partner agreements, laying a solid foundation for Oomi’s entry into the new market. Oomi Mobiili will operate as a virtual mobile network operator, offering customers the option to purchase a mobile subscription together with their electricity contract. The phased launch is set to begin in autumn 2025, with nationwide availability targeted for early 2026. 
Case published 15.8.2025
We advised Nevel Oy in its acquisition of the business of Labio Oy. Lahti Aqua Oy and Salpakierto Oy sold their entire shareholdings in Labio to Nevel, expanding Nevel’s already significant biogas portfolio. The transaction will have no impact on Lahti Aqua’s water utility operations or Salpakierto’s municipal waste management responsibilities. Labio’s operations and customer relationships will continue as before. ‘This partnership is a natural next step for us as we continue investing in sustainable material efficiency and renewable energy solutions. By integrating Labio’s comprehensive offerings and expertise, we can provide customers with a strong platform for material circularity. We are also strengthening our market position as one of Finland’s leading material efficiency solution providers,’ says Ville Koikkalainen, Director of Industrial and Biogas Business at Nevel. Nevel is an energy infrastructure company offering advanced, climate-positive solutions for industry and real estate. It operates more than 130 energy production plants and manages over 40 district heating networks. Nevel’s annual turnover is EUR 150 million, and it employs 190 experts in Finland, Sweden and Estonia.
Case published 16.7.2025
The Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) issued a significant precedent (decision KHO:2025:23) in a case in which it found that the Finnish Motor Insurers’ Centre (Liikennevakuutuskeskus, LVK) processed patient data in accordance with the requirements concerning fairness, data minimisation, and privacy by design and by default when deciding on compensation claims. We represented LVK in this case in which the SAC upheld the Administrative Court’s decision to repeal the EUR 52,000 administrative fine imposed on LVK by the Sanctions Board of the Office of the Data Protection Ombudsman. The SAC also confirmed the Administrative Court’s decision, which, as far as we know, was the first of its kind in Finland, ordering the Office of the Data Protection Ombudsman to reimburse some of our client’s legal costs. The decision bears great significance for the insurance industry as a whole. The crux of the matter were LVK’s information requests under the Motor Liability Insurance Act for patient data that were essential in determining insurance or compensation claims. In certain cases, making a decision may require extensive patient data. The Office of the Data Protection Ombudsman had found that LVK had systematically made overly broad information requests infringing Articles 5 and 25 of the GDPR and that the information should have been provided in the form of separate medical opinions. The Administrative Court repealed the Data Protection Ombudsman’s decision and found that patient records from medical appointments are, as a general rule, essential in establishing causality in compensation matters. It also stated that the tasks related to the consideration of compensation matters are specifically the core tasks of the insurance company and not of the controller of patient data. Furthermore, the Administrative Court found no evidence indicating that LVK would have systematically made overly broad information requests. ‘Once again, our collaboration with C&S was seamless throughout this extensive process, and we could trust that our case was in expert hands’, says Visa Kronbäck, Chief Legal Officer of the Insurance Centre. The full decision is available on the SAC website (in Finnish):  KHO:2025:23.
Case published 18.6.2025