We successfully represented the long-serving and highly respected attorney-at-law Küllike Namm, who had been accused by the Prosecutor’s Office of breaching conflict-of-interest restrictions in connection with the processing of a detailed spatial plan.
On 5 December 2025, the Supreme Court fully acquitted Küllike Namm, upholding the 2023 decision of the Viru County Court. The Supreme Court held that the defendant was not a public official within the meaning of the Anti-Corruption Act and that her actions did not have a material influence on decisions or actions related to the detailed plan. Therefore, the elements of the offence were not met, and criminal liability was excluded.
A case that should never have reached the court
“This is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court, essentially agreeing with the key arguments that we had already presented to the Prosecutor’s Office before the case was sent to court. Unfortunately, the Prosecutor’s Office still deemed it necessary to pursue litigation ‘to achieve legal clarity,’ which resulted in considerable expense of time and financial costs, as well as stress for the defendant. In reality, this case should never have reached the courtroom,” said Norman Aas, who represented the client.
The court emphasised the importance of the ultima ratio principle in criminal law and the need for the Prosecutor’s Office to avoid overly broad interpretations when bringing charges. The state must also reimburse a significant portion of the legal costs incurred.
Our services and client team
We represented the client on all legal matters related to the proceedings and during the dispute at every level of court proceedings.
The client was represented during the criminal proceedings by our partner Norman Aas.
