Among theorists, there are rather strong differences in opinion whether communicative planning theory helps to fight or advances neo-liberalism. This article takes some distance to the debate concerning the role of communication in planning and analyses it from the point of view of different legal cultures in different European countries. It is argued in the article that the sources of legitimacy of public planning might be fundamentally different outside the Anglo-American context, in which communicative planning theory has largely been developed. Planning works in different ways in different national contexts; this is why it is not obvious that communicative planning theory would help to fight neo-liberalism in planning. The article explores the topic from the Finnish perspective, and draws on writings about legal mentality and comparative law.