As a minority investor in a Finnish PE fund, can I demand more reporting before the next capital call?

Your right to information under Finnish law

Under the Finnish Limited Partnership Act (laki avoimesta yhtiöstä ja kommandiittiyhtiöstä, 389/1988), a limited partner (äääneton yhtiömies) has a statutory right to inspect the partnership's books and records and to receive information about the partnership's affairs. This right exists by law and cannot be fully excluded by the partnership agreement, though the agreement can regulate the manner and timing of disclosure.

If the fund is structured as a Finnish alternative investment fund (AIF), the AIFM Act (laki vaihtoehtorahastojen hoitajista, 162/2014) imposes additional transparency obligations on the fund manager. These include periodic reporting on portfolio composition, valuation methods, costs and fees, and leverage. As an investor, you're entitled to this information, and the level of detail in quarterly reports should meet the regulatory standard — not just whatever the GP chooses to share.

What you can concretely request
You're well within your rights to request portfolio-level valuations and the methodology used, a detailed fee breakdown (management fees, carried interest accrual, transaction fees, and any fund-level expenses), information on any related-party transactions, and the basis for the capital call amount and its intended use. Frame this as exercising your statutory and contractual information rights. Review your LPA carefully — most Finnish fund LPAs include a specific information rights clause, and many reference FVCA (Finnish Venture Capital Association) or ILPA standards.

Can you delay or withhold payment on the capital call?
This is where you need to be careful. Capital call obligations are typically unconditional contractual commitments under the LPA. Failing to fund a capital call usually triggers severe default provisions — dilution, forfeiture of your interest, or even damages claims. Finnish contract law (oikeustoimilaki) does give you certain defenses if the GP is in material breach of its own obligations (such as systematic failure to provide legally required disclosures), and you could in theory invoke a right of retention (pidätysoikeus) or argue breach. However, this is a high-risk strategy. Courts and arbitral tribunals generally treat capital call defaults very seriously, and the burden would be on you to demonstrate that the GP's failure to disclose was sufficiently material to justify withholding.

Practical recommendation
The safer approach is a two-track one. First, send a formal written request (with clear legal basis) demanding the specific information you need, referencing both the LPA provisions and the applicable statutory framework. Set a reasonable deadline. Second, fund the capital call on time to avoid default, but reserve your rights in writing — state explicitly that payment does not constitute a waiver of your right to full disclosure and that you reserve the right to pursue remedies if adequate information is not forthcoming.

If the GP remains unresponsive, your escalation options include raising the issue with the fund's advisory committee (if one exists), filing a complaint with the FIN-FSA if the manager is a licensed AIFM, or ultimately pursuing arbitration or litigation under the dispute resolution clause in your LPA.