Programme [PDF]

Wednesday, 5 October

20:00–22:00     Welcoming evening at Tartu Widget Factory (Kolm Tilli, Kastani 42)
The welcoming evening will include an expression of gratitude for the reviews of company law and insolvency law. Speech by Minister of Justice Lea Danilson-Järg.
In addition, thanks are also due to the contributors of the work 'Monograph on Legal Reforms'.
Authors: Karin Sein, Merike Ristikivi, Jaan Sootak, Ragne Piir, Katre Luhamaa, Gerda Johanson, Kadriann Ikkonen


Thursday, 6 October

9:00–10:00       Morning coffee (University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4; doors will open at 8:45)

Plenary meeting
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

10:00                 Opening
      Jüri Ratas, President of the Riigikogu

      
Hannes Vallikivi, Attorney-at-Law and Partner, Advokaadibüroo WALLESS,       Doctoral Student, School of Law, University of Tartu
      When Estonia was Governed by Lawyers. The Impact and Significance of the       Estonian Lawyers’ Days from 1922–1940 on the Estonian State and Law

 The presentation will discuss whether and how much of an impact the Lawyers’ Days could have had on Estonia and whether something similar could be achieved today.

30 Years of the Constitution. How was the Constitution Made?
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

Moderators:        Heiki Loot, Justice of the Supreme Court, Chairman of the Constitutional Law        Endowment Panel, Estonian Academy of Sciences
       Mag. iur. Nele Parrest, Justice of the Supreme Court

Participants in the discussion: Jüri Adams, Member of the Constitutional Assembly, Head of the Working Group on the Draft on which the Work of the Constitutional Assembly is Based, former Minister of Justice and Member of the Riigikogu; Tõnu Anton, Chairman of the Constitutional Assembly, former Chairman of the Administrative Law Chamber of the Supreme Court;
PhD Liia Hänni, Chair of the Editing Committee of the Constitutional Assembly, former minister and Member of the Riigikogu, Chief Expert on E-democracy; PhD Jüri Raidla, Expert of the Constitutional Assembly, Minister of Justice from 1990–1992, Attorney-at-Law and Senior Partner, Ellex Raidla Advokaadibüroo

How were the foundations of the restored Estonian State, fundamental human rights, and legal reforms laid? What were the fundamental choices, the critical and dramatic moments, what worked and should anything have been done differently? The authors of the Constitution recall and express their thoughts 30 years later.

11:40–12:00     Awarding the “Õiguse eest seisja” prizes – Lea Danilson-Järg, Minister of          Justice

12:00–12:30     Coffee break

Restoring the Rule of Law in Estonia from 1992–2002
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

Moderator:         MA Heili Sepp, Justice of the Supreme Court

12:30–14:00
Introduction and historical overview: dr. iur. Karin Sein, Professor, University of Tartu; PhD Merike Ristikivi, Associate Professor, University of Tartu

Participants in the discussion: Heiki Loot, Justice of the Supreme CourtMihkel Oviir, Former Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice; dr. iur. Priit Pikamäe, Advocate General, Court of Justice, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; dr. iur. Priidu Pärna, former Deputy Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice; Märt Rask, former Minister of Justice;
PhD Paul Varul, former Minister of Justice, Professor Emeritus, University of Tartu

The panel discussion will look at the origins and background of the legal reforms carried out in Estonia between 1992 and 2002. The topic of legislation will focus in particular on the Law of Obligations Act and the Penal Code, which will be twenty years old in 2022. In terms of time, the focus is on the decade starting with the adoption of the Constitution and ending with the entry into force of the two major codes, i.e. the Law of Obligations Act and the Penal Code, in 2002. The participants in the plenary meeting discussion are key people who worked in the Ministry of Justice and led the reforms during the decade in question, who will open up the background to the decisions taken at the time, and give a retrospective assessment of what choices made at the time have stood the test of time, what should have been done differently, and what the health of the Estonian rule of law is like today.

14:00–15:15     Participants move to the sections where lunch will take place

Is Our Constitution Well Protected? Part 2
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

Moderator:         PhD Uno Lõhmus, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

15:15–16:45
PhD Madis Ernits, Judge, Tartu Circuit Court
Main Problems with the Estonian Constitutional Review Model
Dr. iur. Paloma Krõõt Tupay, Lecturer of Constitutional Law, University of Tartu
The Will of the Legislator or the Decision of the Judge? An Attempt to Assess the Strength of Constitutional Review Against the Legislator
Mag. iur. Aaro Mõttus, Visiting Lecturer of Constitutional Law, University of Tartu, Doctoral student, School of Law, University of Tartu
Political Decision-Making and Constitutional Review: Roles and Procedures

The debate on constitutional review launched in the constitutional law section of the previous Lawyers’ Days continues. Estonia has chosen a peculiar model for constitutional review. Pre-presidential control, ex-post control by the Chancellor of Justice, and the absence of a separate constitutional court are its hallmarks. What are the main problems with this model, what is good and what could be better, and most importantly, is our Constitution well protected – this is what former and current constitutional law professors at the University of Tartu will discuss.

16:45–17:15    Coffee break

Quo Vadis, Future Work? Social Protection in Modern Employment Relations Regulation
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

Moderator:     LLD Annika Rosin, Assistant Professor of Labour and Social Law, University of Turku

17:15–18:45    
Mag. iur. Thea Treier, Counsellor for Labour Affairs, Permanent Representation of Estonia to the EU
Is the European Union Exceeding its Competence to Regulate Minimum Wage?
PhD Seili Suder, Head of the Employment Relations and Working Environment Department, Ministry of Social Affairs
What Regulation Does Teleworking Need?
Dr. iur. Merle Erikson, Professor on Labour Law, University of Tartu
Mandatory Vaccination in Employment Relationship
Liina Naaber-Kivisoo, Judge, Viru County Court
Challenges in Employment Relations Regulation in the Corona Crisis

Technological developments, globalisation, changing values, and other changes in society have changed the content of work and the way it is done. New forms and ways of working have become commonplace. Both the employee and the employer attach importance to greater freedom of agreement in regulating future work. However, the trend in the regulation of employment relations tends to be more towards setting out detailed rules of conduct for the parties to an employment relationship. Discussion focuses on whether and why detail is needed when setting and implementing minimum wages, teleworking as well as rules on safety and health at work.


Obligation to Enter into Contract and Anonymisation of Liability in 2022 – from Crowdfunding to Cryptocurrency in the Context of Contract Law
(V Spa conference centre, Riia 2)

Moderator:       PhD Marko Kairjak, Vice Chairman of the Estonian Legal Science Society,        Attorney-at-Law and Partner, Ellex Raidla Advokaadibüroo

15:15–16:45
Participants in the discussion: PhD Nikita Divissenko, Utrecht University School of Law, Netherlands; Siim Tammer, Member of the Management Board, Financial Supervision Authority, Doctoral student,  School of Law, University of TartuReimo Hammerberg, CEO, Ignium OÜ

Over the last decade in particular, the financial sector has taken a different view of the obligation to conclude a contract. In today’s world of financial services, everyone’s right to a basic means of settlement, i.e. a bank account, has become a more diversified right to make affordable payments through a non-bank payment intermediary, to earn a daily supplement to the pension pillar through a fashionable mobile app, to finance things collectively and sustainably and, finally, to say goodbye to the centrally controlled and therefore boring ordinary means of payment and make transfers in cryptocurrency. This is the new normal and the Law of Obligations Act has had to keep pace. Has KYC/AML changed the obligation to enter into a contract and the right to terminate a contract? The theme of the section will be to what extent the legislator should safeguard investor rights in the world of alternative finance: protection under company law vs. contractual relations, the complex choices of supervision in the control of standard terms and conditions, the deconstruction of complex financial instruments. What is certain is that the flight from the obligations of a licence to operate has led to complex contractual relationships that can create risks for Estonia: crowdfunding, ICOs, payment services.

16:45–17:15     Coffee break

Punishment – Retribution or Prevention?
(V Spa conference centre, Riia 2)

Moderators:       PhD Anneli Soo, Associate Professor of Criminal Law, University of Tartu
                              PhD Andreas Kangur, District Prosecutor, Viru District Prosecutor’s Office,                    Lecturer of Criminal Procedure, University of Tartu

17:15–18:45     
PhD Anneli Soo, Associate Professor of Criminal Law, University of Tartu
What are the Aims of Punishment in Accordance with § 56 of the Penal Code?
Mari-Liis Mägi, Clinical Forensic Psychologist, Expert of Forensic Psychology
Is the Change in Behaviour Triggered by a Whip or a Carrot?

Participants in the discussion: Elina Elkind, Judge, Harju County Court; Mihkel Gaver, Attorney-at-Law, Advokaadibüroo GAVER; Toomas Liiva, Senior Prosecutor, Southern District Prosecutor’s Office; Mari-Liis Mägi, Clinical Forensic Psychologist, Expert of Forensic Psychology

It has been twenty years since the Penal Code entered into force. Subsection 56 (1) of the Penal Code provides a guiding hand to the sentencing of the offender to take into account not only the offence but also the person of the offender. Whether, how, and why to do it? Experts with a total of 68 years of experience in the application of punishments will take part in the debate.


Amendments to Lease Contract Regulation
(Tartu University library conference centre, Struve 1)

Moderator:       PhD Paul Varul, Professor Emeritus, University of Tartu, Attorney-at-Law and         Senior Partner, Advokaadibüroo TGS

15:15–16:45  
Tõnu Toompark, Member of the Management Board, Estonian Owners’ Confederation
What is Wrong with Tenancy Law Regulation and How can We Fix It?
Vaike Murumets, Director of Private Law Division, Ministry of Justice
Is a Definitive Solution to the Problem of Lessee Refusing to Leave Possible?
Dr. iur. Karin Sein, Professor of Civil Law, University of Tartu
Disputes Related to Lease Contracts in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The rules on residential lease contracts are perhaps the most reformed part of the Law of Obligations Act in its twenty-year history and, unlike the changes brought about by the transposition of EU consumer law directives, the changes to the regulation of lease contracts have been brought about by purely domestic developments. At the beginning of 2021, there was a major reform of tenancy law, preceded by lessors’ representatives raising the issue of lessees refusing to leave and arguing that Estonia’s tenancy regulation is too lessee-biased. The aim of the section is to critically assess the changes in the regulation of residential leases over the twenty years of the Law of Obligations Act and to ask whether the current regulation strikes a reasonable balance between the interests of the contracting parties. In addition to the reform of the lease of dwellings, the constraints imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic have raised the question of whether Estonia’s lease regulation is flexible enough to deal with the problems raised by such an extraordinary crisis.

16:45–17:15    Coffee break

Role of Social Rights in the Constitution
(Tartu University library conference centre, Struve 1)

Moderator:       Dr. iur. Gaabriel Tavits, Professor of Social Law at the University of Tartu

17:15–18:45
PhD Katre Luhamaa, Lecturer of European Law, University of Tartu
Responsibilities of the State to Ensure the Well-Being of Children from Vulnerable Families
LLM Mari-Liis Viirsalu, Doctoral student, School of Law, University of Tartu
Market-Based Organisation of Social Services on the Basis of Individual Choice – in Whose Interest?
Mag. iur. Merle Malvet, Adviser, Social Rights Department, Office of the Chancellor of Justice
Fundamental Right to Social Security

The section will discuss the nature and importance of fundamental social rights. Social rights in the Estonian Constitution – 30 years of theory and practical experience. The focus is on the role and responsibility of both the state and the individual in providing social protection, and the scope of social protection guaranteed by the Constitution.


Supreme Court as an Interpreter of Criminal Law
(Hotel Lydia event centre, Ülikooli 14)

Moderator:       Markus Kärner, Deputy Secretary General, Criminal Policy Department, Ministry        of Justice, Doctoral student at the School of Law, University of Tartu

15:15–16:45
Participants in the discussion: PhD Jaan Sootak, Professor Emeritus, University of Tartu;
PhD Paavo Randma, Judge of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court; dr. iur. Erkki Hirsnik, Judge of the Criminal Chamber of Tartu Circuit Court; mag. iur. Andres Parmas, Prosecutor General

Inevitably, there is a space between the text of the law and real life that needs to be filled. During the twenty years of the existence of the Penal Code, the decisions of the Supreme Court have been of great importance in further developing the law and ensuring its uniform application. Although the legislator has not given the decisions of the Supreme Court precedential value in matters of substantive law, the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court de facto binds all those applying the law. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision is often not limited to an individual case. The section deals with the role of the Supreme Court as an interpreter of criminal law. We discuss how the Supreme Court has developed criminal law over the past twenty years and how much room the legislator should leave for interpretation. What are the considerations on which the justice of the Supreme Court bases their decision? How does legal dogmatics develop and can it be borrowed from Germany, for example? What do legal scholars and practitioners expect from the Supreme Court? Where is the dividing line between interpreting the law and establishing it?

16:45–17:15    Coffee break

Protection of the Author and the Performer as the Weaker Party to an Author’s Contract and the Renewed Regulation of This in the Copyright Act
(Hotel Lydia event centre, Ülikooli 14)

Moderator:       PhD Aleksei Kelli, Professor of Intellectual Property, University of Tartu

17:15–18:45    
Legislative perspective: Kärt Nemvalts, Director, Intellectual Property and Competition Law Division, Ministry of Justice
Regulation of Author’s Contracts in Copyright Act, Background, and Selected Solutions
Academic perspective: dr. iur. Irene Kull, Head of the Department of Private Law, School of Law, University of Tartu, Professor of Civil Law
Suitability of the Amendments to the Copyright Act Within the General Contract Law Framework
Practical view by the authors: Eeva Mägi, Member of the Management Board, Estonian Association of Audiovisual Authors, Attorney-at-Law and Partner, Maria Mägi Advokaadibüroo
How will the Amendments Help Protect the Interests of Authors?
Practical view of rights by the user: Toomas Seppel, Attorney-at-Law and Partner, Advokaadibüroo Hedman Partners & Co
How Big a Change will the New Regulation Bring for Movie Producers?

The Copyright Act entered into force on 12 December 1992. This means that it is one of the longest-standing pieces of legislation in our legal order that has continuously regulated an area. However, the law has also been amended more than 40 times, often to transpose EU directives. Some of the more substantial amendments entered into force on 7 January 2022 in relation to the two 2019 directives (2019/789 and 2019/790). Authors’ contracts have in fact been governed by the Copyright Act since its entry into force, but there have been no previous requirements at EU level. Now is the right time to take a look at these latest amendments and to discuss the extent to which the rules laid down in the Copyright Act are balanced in the light of EU law, whether and how the amendments affect, for example, employment relations, and the background to the creation of audiovisual works.


Friday, 7 October

Liability of Legal Persons
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

Moderator:       Juhan Sarv, Justice of the Supreme Court

09:30–11:00
Participants in the discussion: dr. iur. Priit Pikamäe, Advocate General, Court of Justice;
PhD Laura Aiaots, State Prosecutor; Velmar Brett, Justice of the Supreme Court

Derivative liability: justification of the catalogue in subsection 14 (1) of the Penal Code and alternatives to the catalogue solution. Do we need derivative liability and a closed list in subsection 14 (1) of the Penal Code? Execution and inaction: is there a via media, or third way, possible in the current classical generic approach?
Stigma and legal subjectivity – practical solutions still lacking.

11:00–11:30    Coffee break

National Law versus EU Law
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

Moderator:         PhD Rait Maruste, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

11:30–13:00
Introduction to the topic: prof Anneli Albi, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom
Participants in the discussion: prof Anneli Albi, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom; PhD Carri Ginter, Associate Professor of European Law, University of Tartu, Jean Monnet Chair Holder; Klen Jäärats, Director for European Union Affairs, Government Office; mag. iur. Nele Parrest, Justice of the Supreme Court

Starting point for the EU: who created what and for what purpose? Is the primacy of EU law absolute, i.e. does it unconditionally cover all branches and fields of law, i.e. did the states give the EU a blank cheque to decide on its constitution?
If the primacy has its limits, where and how are they set and how are potential disputes resolved? Does the uniformity and rigid supremacy of EU law enrich or impoverish? What is the impact of this doctrine on the EU mindset and Euroscepticism?


Consumer Credit in 2022: the Completely Free Will of Completely Free People to be Completely Free to Take on Liabilities and Remain Completely Free in Debt?
(V Spa conference centre, Riia 2)

Moderator:       PhD Piia Kalamees, Associate Professor of Civil Law, University of Tartu

09:30–11:00
Participants in the discussion: PhD Piia Kalamees, Associate Professor of Civil Law, University of Tartu; Kilvar Kessler, Chairman of the Management Board, Estonian Financial Supervision and Resolution Authority; Vahur-Peeter Liin, Judge, Civil Chamber, Tartu Circuit Court;
Martha Skirta, Bondora AS; Maarita Meri, Head of Department, Private Debt Management and Small Finance Decision-Making Department in Estonia, Swedbank AS; Jüri Puust, Head of the Judicial Proceedings Department, Swedbank AS 

Issues that have become topical in the aftermath of the financial crisis in 2009, such as the availability of instant loans, the application of the principle of responsible lending, the use of unfair standard terms, and procedural obstacles to consumer protection, will remain relevant in 2022. In addition, a number of new issues have emerged, such as the limitation of the credit burden, the possibility of applying consumer credit provisions in adversarial proceedings, the clarity of the rules, the possibilities for creditors to anticipate problems, and the use of IT solutions.
The section will answer the questions of whether the current provisions on consumer credit are sufficient to protect the interests of consumers, what the possible solutions are, and what the perspective of consumer credit law is.

11:00–11:30    Coffee break

Platforms Mediating the Sale of Goods and Provision of Services and Their Role as Intermediaries or Main Providers
(V Spa conference centre, Riia 2)

Moderator:         Sander Kärson, Attorney-at-Law and Leading Partner, Advokaadibüroo TGS Baltic

11:30–13:00
Participants in the discussion: Kristi Pent, Attorney-at-Law and Partner, Advokaadibüroo TGS Baltic; dr. iur. Martin Käerdi, Attorney-at-Law and Partner, Ellex Raidla Advokaadibüroo, Associate Professor of Civil Law, University of Tartu; Henri Arras, Head of Public Policy (tbc), BOLT

Online platforms for the sale of goods or the provision of services have become increasingly common in the new economic environment and are gaining significant market power, replacing traditional individual distribution channels for businesses. The nature of the legal relationships involved in the use of such online platforms remains unclear in many cases. The moderator and the participants, together with the audience, will brainstorm together to dissect and make sense of these legal relationships. Answers will be sought to the question of liability for the provision of goods or services ordered through platforms, as well as to the justification for reclassifying the contracts of platform operators as employment contracts; competition law issues related to the operation of platforms will be addressed, as well as the means to control the market power of platforms, and economic governance issues related to the legal regulation of platforms.


Climate Law 2022. “We Know Where We Want to Go, But How do We Get There?”
Climate law section is dedicated to Hannes Veinla, Docent Emeritus, University of Tartu.
(Tartu University library conference centre, Struve 1)

Moderator:       Dr. iur. Ivo Pilving, Chairman of the Administrative Law Chamber of the Supreme       Court; Associate Professor of Administrative Law, University of Tartu

09:30–11:00    
Kädi Ristkok, Head of Climate Department, Ministry of the Environment
Setting Climate Targets in Legislation and Development Plans
Kärt Vaarmari, Consultant, Estonian Environmental Law Center
Climate Change and Human Rights
Raul Kirjanen, Entrepreneur
Entrepreneur’s View on Climate Targets

In the climate section, we will discuss how we can achieve a society where our way of life is climate neutral. Does the state know the way to this goal? How to ensure the protection of people’s rights in a changing climate and in the context of societal transition? What is the vision of entrepreneurs and what do they expect from the state?

11:00–11:30     Coffee break

Human Rights in Times of Crisis
(Tartu University library conference centre, Struve 1)

Moderator:         Minna-Liina Lind, Estonian Special Envoy for Human Rights and Migration

11:30–13:00
LLM Peeter Roosma, Judge, European Court of Human Rights
View of the European Court of Human Rights of the Crisis from a Human Rights Perspective
PhD Tiina Pajuste, Professor of International Law and Security, Tallinn University
Protecting Human Rights in Times of Crisis from the Perspective of Private Companies
Dr. iur. Mart Susi, Professor of Human Rights Law, Tallinn University
Impact of Crises on the General Principles of Human Rights

The aim of the section is to discuss the impact of the global crises of recent years (COVID-19 and Russia’s aggression in Ukraine) on the universality of human rights and to address the practical problems of ensuring human rights.


100 Years Since the First Estonian Lawyers’ Days
(Hotel Lydia event centre, Ülikooli 14)

Moderator:         Dr. iur. Marju Luts-Sootak, Professor of Legal History at the University of Tartu

09:30–11:00
Mag. iur. Toomas Anepaio, Data Protection Specialist-Archivist, Supreme Court
Baltic German Prologue. About the Lawyers’ Days 160 Years Ago.
Dr. iur. Priidu Pärna, Tallinn Notary
Unknown Ferdinand Karlson, Initiator of the Estonian Lawyers’ Days
Dr. iur. Hesi Siimets-Gross, Associate Professor of Legal History and Roman Law, University of Tartu, Lawyer Linguist, European Court of Justice
Jüri Uluots and the Estonian Lawyers’ Days
Kai Amos, Attorney-at-Law, Advokaadibüroo Amos
Recollections on the Restoration of the Tradition of Organising the Estonian Lawyers’ Days

The first Estonian Lawyers’ Days were held in Tartu from 19–20 April 1922, under the auspices of the Tartu Lawyers’ Society. The society was led by Ferdinand Karlson, an active lawyer, sportsman, and cultural figure, about whom Priidu Pärna will give a presentation. The German Lawyers’ Days are still cited as a model, i.e. the first attempt to bring together local lawyers was made 60 years earlier, and Toomas Anepaio talks about it. From the presentation of Hesi Siimets-Gross, we will learn about the role played by Jüri Uluots in the Estonian Lawyers’ Days that took place during the interwar period. Kai Amos recalls the difficulties and joys of re-establishing the tradition of the Lawyers’ Days in the 1990s.

11:00–11:30     Coffee break

Role of the Judge in Adversarial Criminal Proceedings
(Hotel Lydia event centre, Ülikooli 14)

Moderator:       Taavi Pern, Chief State Prosecutor

11:30–13:00
Ingrid Kullerkann, Judge, Tartu County Court
High-quality End Result or the Beauty of the Game, or Both? Expectations of the Judge of the Parties to a Proceeding
PhD Andreas Kangur, District Prosecutor, Viru District Prosecutor’s Office, Lecturer of Criminal Procedure, University of Tartu
Let the Accuser Prosecute, the Counsel Defend, the Court Enjoy the Game
Dmitri Školjar, Member of the Management Board, Estonian Bar Association, Attorney-at-Law and Partner, Advokaadibüroo CLARUS
Court Lasts, Injustice Disappears (Estonian Proverb). The Right Decision is Not Made in Haste

Although the current Code of Criminal Procedure entered into force in 2004, it is in recent years that a number of adversarial proceedings have attracted public attention. Bystanders say that the procedures are slow, the accused-counsels say that they are unfair, and prosecutors say that they are ineffective. What should be changed? In the discussion, the prosecutor, the judge, and the lawyer will give their views and opinions on how judicial proceedings should and could be managed. They also discuss how the judge should position themselves in adversarial criminal proceedings and focus on how to strike a balance between ensuring the rights of the defence of the weaker party, the efficiency and speed of the proceedings, and not casting doubt on the impartiality of the court.

13:00–14:00     Lunch, participants moving to the closing session

Henn Jõks foundation scholarships
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

14:00–14:15
The winners will be announced by Allar Jõks, Attorney-at-Law and Partner, Advokaadibüroo SORAINEN.

Final Meeting. Science-Based Law
(University of Tartu Sports Hall, Ujula 4)

Moderator:         Märt Treier

14:15–15:45
Debating at the podium: prof Tarmo Soomere, President, Estonian Academy of Sciences;
Kaja Tael, Ambassador, Special Envoy for Climate and Energy Policy;
Helen Sooväli-Sepping, Vice-Rector for Green Transformation, Tallinn University of Technology; Marti Hääl, Entrepreneur; Raivo Vare, Economic Expert

Unlike the plenary meeting of the Lawyers’ Days, which looks to the past by recalling the history of legal reforms, followed by panels on topical legal issues of the present, the closing session aims to look towards the future. Undoubtedly, there is more than one challenge facing Estonian society and the legal system, but this time we are looking at the future through the prism of the green transition. If climate and environmental objectives need to be integrated into all aspects of life in order to be achieved, how should the law respond to this challenge? Should the art of goodness and justice, with a view to the goals of the green transition, be based more on the latest scientific facts and research, be science-based justice? Have the crises that Estonian society has been going through in recent years, such as the corona crisis, and the crises we continue to live through, including the climate crisis and Russia’s military aggression against the peaceful European state of Ukraine, should lead to legal scholars and lawmakers to seek more help and ask for help from other disciplines? What should be the balance between lawyers and other professionals in shaping the law of the future?

Closing words