Contractual matters

The contracting parties must agree on the confidentiality of their agreements. Any non-disclosure agreements cannot supersede the right of consumers to obtain information about to whom customer complaints can be submitted. 

Any non-disclosure agreements cannot supersede the statutory obligation to submit information to the authorities or publish information. 

The contracting parties must determine whether the agreement can be transferred to third parties and agree on the preconditions and procedures of such transfers. 

If the agreement can be transferred, it must be ensured that the party to which the agreement is transferred meets the legal requirements set for opening or using an interface

The contracting parties must agree on how any disputes are settled. Primarily, disputes should be settled in mutual negotiations. Any disputes that cannot be settled in mutual negotiations, can be settled in a district court or in arbitration proceedings.  

In a limited number of cases, the supervisory authority can determine whether or not the statutory obligations have been fulfilled. 
Regarding contractual negotiations over minimum products, the Finnish Transport and Communications Agency Traficom can, in its capacity as the supervisory authority, decide whether or not a clause is in accordance with compelling legal obligations. 

An agreement can only be valid for a fixed term or until further notice. An agreement ends when one of the parties submits a termination or cancellation notice or by a mutual agreement between the contracting parties. 

An agreement on a minimum product cannot be terminated or cancelled unilaterally on the basis of a reason related to a contracting party that cannot be considered to be in accordance with the requirements set for the obligation to open a sales interface as defined in the Act on Transport Services. 

Termination criteria for agreements other than those on minimum products are defined in accordance with general contractual principles. 
If problems arise, the primary option should always be an amicable settlement and, in serious situations, a temporary suspension of the provision of the interface.

When the agreement ends, any impact on other parties to the mobility service network must be taken into account.

The contracting parties must agree on the presentation of trademarks. 

It must be possible in the agreement chain that an integrated mobility service shows trademarks of available passenger and goods transport services to its customers. 

It must also be possible in the agreement chain that the trademark of passenger and goods transport services is shown on a ticket or otherwise in the integrated mobility service’s product or service environment (such as applications). 

The regulations on the obligations to provide information depend on the mode of transport and the roles of parties and passengers (consumer/business traveller). 

The parties must be aware of their statutory obligations to provide information.

It is also recommended that the parties agree on the following: 

• Are all obligations to provide information regarding the sale of a travel chain assigned to a single party? If the obligations are made the responsibility of a single party, how will the costs be divided? 
  
• Who will be responsible for the proper fulfilment of the obligations to provide information concerning marketing and sales situations, as set out in the Consumer Protection Act, and any overlapping obligations to provide information determined by the mode of transport?
• Providers of passenger and goods transport services may also be held liable on the basis of the MaaS operator’s marketing activities. How can the parties ensure that the marketing and sales information about the MaaS operator’s services is appropriate and fulfils all statutory requirements? 
• How can the MaaS operator obtain information about the changes made in the information provided for passengers before entering into an agreement? 

Responsibilities between the contracting parties may remain unclear if they fail to agree on them. 

It should be noted that agreements on the mutual distribution of responsibilities must not weaken the legal position of consumers. Such contractual clauses are not valid. 

It is recommended that the parties agree on the principles governing the way in which they may receive compensation from their contracting parties if they have paid compensation to a passenger for losses that they have not caused. 

The contracting parties should agree on the availability and capacity of the sales interface (SLA). 

The Act on Transport Services does not set out any quality or availability requirements for the service or sales interface. However, under the act, the terms of access and use must be reasonable and provided on a non-discriminatory basis. Under the act, contracting parties must cooperate in order to enable interoperability by means of practical arrangements. 

With regard to authenticating the integrated mobility service and tickets of the contracting parties, the availability of the sales interface and any interfaces of a ticket and payment system separate from the sales interface is highly important. 

The contracting parties should ensure that, when planning and implementing maintenance work and modifications, they take the impact on the other contracting party and, if required, other parties to the mobility service network into account. The contracting parties should also ensure that they perform any maintenance work and modifications in such a way and at such times that the service interruptions are as short as possible and have a minimum impact.