30.8.2022

The Artificial Intelligence Act and consumer protection – are you ready?

Artificial intelligence, or AI for short, plays a major role in the modern lives of people and companies. Various automations and algorithms govern online services, online trade and digital marketing. This has a significant impact on consumer behaviour. When it comes to consumer protection, the new regulation aims to increase consumers’ trust in AI and increase responsibility and safety in the market’s technological development. On 21 April 2021, the European Commission proposed a regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence. According to estimates, the regulation could enter into force before the end of the year. With a transitional period of two years, the regulation would become applicable by the end of 2024.

The definition of AI and the Artificial Intelligence Act in light of consumer protection

A typical problem concerning AI is that it is very difficult to define, at least exhaustively. The Act defines AI as a software that has the ability, for a given set of human-defined objectives, to generate outputs such as content, predictions, recommendations, or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts. AI is not offered to consumers in a raw format. Instead, consumers receive products or services that are controlled by sophisticated algorithms and software.

The proposed regulation does not create new consumer rights or form new appeal proceedings as such. According to the proposal, when harmful AI practices and systems do not fall under the scope of prohibited AI practices as defined in the proposed regulation, they would be covered by general data and consumer protection legislation. The focus of the proposed regulation is on defining certain prohibited practices and strictly regulated high-risk systems. These practices are examined both on an industry and on a sector basis.

Prohibited practices

The proposal prohibits the use of AI systems that create an unacceptable risk. These systems create such an obvious threat to the safety, rights and livelihoods of people that the regulation prohibits their use entirely. Such systems include ones that have the potential to manipulate people through subliminal techniques beyond their conscious awareness and that are likely to cause psychological or physical harm. The proposal also prohibits certain systems that use social scoring, as they are considered contrary to fundamental values of the EU. They can also lead to discrimination.

High-risk systems

The proposal classifies as high-risk such AI systems that are intended to be used as safety components of products, for example, as well as systems that pose a high risk of harm to health and safety and that are used in specific areas. The proposal lists some examples of high-risk AI systems, including systems used as safety components in the management and operation of the supply of water, gas, heating and electricity, and systems used to evaluate the creditworthiness of natural persons in relation to essential private and public services.

The obligations of providers of high-risk AI systems are laid down in Article 16 of the proposed regulation. Among other things, such providers of AI systems shall:

Obligation to disclose information

The obligation to disclose information is central to the general principles of consumer protection. In the context of AI use, the obligation to disclose information is therefore a general principle for all AI systems affecting consumers. This means that consumers must have easy access to sufficient, clear and timely information on the existence of an AI system, its deductive processes and possible outcomes and its effects on consumers. Consumers must also be told how they can request the system’s operations to be reviewed or fixed and how they can contact a competent person. Information on disputing the matter must also be provided.

Further specifications to AI regulation

The Artificial Intelligence Act is meant to be a part of a larger whole, and some parts are not yet known. For example, there will be a separate proposal concerning the liability issues surrounding AI. It is likely that this proposal will be applicable to consumer protection as well. The proposal will also have several connecting factors to existing EU regulation, such as data protection and market supervision regulation and the general EU regulation on consumer protection binding on businesses.

Sources:

https://www.kkv.fi/ajankohtaista/lausunnot/lausunto-u-28-2021-vp-valtioneuvoston-kirjelma-eduskunnalle-komission-ehdotuksesta-euroopan-parlamentin-ja-neuvoston-asetukseksi-tekoalyn-harmonisoiduksi-saantelyksi-artificial-intelligence-act/

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0206&from=EN

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