Merilampi represented Elisa Corporation at the Supreme Court in a case concerning the Consumer Ombudsman’s demand to prohibit Elisa from using a contract term in its telephone subscription agreements according to which paper invoices would be subject to an additional charge. According to the contract term, a consumer could choose to receive paper invoices as a billing method, however subject to an additional charge of EUR 1,90 per invoice. The Consumer Ombudsman had demanded the additional charge for paper invoices to be removed entirely, but the Market Court held that the prohibition was only applicable to charges of EUR 1,90 or more per paper invoice. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Market Court. In its judgment, the Supreme Court held that neither the contract term concerning the additional charge nor the actual charge for paper bills was unreasonable. The Supreme Court held that there were acceptable objectives for electronic invoicing without a charge, such as protecting the environment, promoting an information society and minimising costs.