Journals / Uluslararası Ticaret ve Tahkim Hukuku Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

İNGİLİZ VE TÜRK HUKUKUNDA YABANCI HAKEM KARARLARININ TANINMASI VE TENFİZİNİN MUKAYESESİ

COMPARISON OF THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF TRANSNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS UNDER TURKISH AND ENGLISH LAWS*

Pages
433–494
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this study, the different attitude of Turkish and English courts that might occur due to public policy, commercial realities or concept of arbitrability will be compared and analyzed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Arbitration as a dispute resolution system is becoming more important nowadays between international business actors.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Arbitration tribunal process is important but another important point is the enforcement of arbitration awards because if an arbitration award cannot be recognised or enforced, there is no purpose of having a decision of arbitrators.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study, the different attitude of Turkish and English courts that might occur due to public policy, commercial realities or concept of arbitrability will be compared and analyzed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Arbitration as a dispute resolution system is becoming more important nowadays between international business actors. Arbitration tribunal process is important but another important point is the enforcement of arbitration awards because if an arbitration award cannot be recognised or enforced, there is no purpose of having a decision of arbitrators. In international disputes, it is possible that award creditors might need to pursue enforcement of arbitration awards outside the arbitral seat against another country’s assets. There are some different approaches between the countries’ court to finality of arbitration awards. Turkish courts have differences from English court as to the right of appeal, and these courts at some point deal differently with the enforcement of arbitration awards. In this study, the different attitude of Turkish and English courts that might occur due to public policy, commercial realities or concept of arbitrability will be compared and analyzed.

Özet

aktörleri açısından gittikçe artan ölçüde önem taşımaktadır. Tahkim yargılaması kadar önem taşıyan diğer bir husus hakem kararının icra edilebilir olmasıdır. Çünkü eğer hakem kararı verildiği ülke dışında tanınmaz ve tenfiz edilmezse hakem kararının bir anlamı kalmayacaktır. Milletlerarası nitelikli uyuşmazlıklarda, kesinleşmiş hakem kararının verildiği ülke dışında bulunan malvarlığı üzerinde icrası gerekli olabilir. Bu bağlamda, hakem kararının kesinleşip kesinlemediği hususunda farklı yaklaşımlar bulunmaktadır. Türk ve İngiliz mahkemeleri, hakem kararlarına karşı müracaat yolları ve hakem kararlarının tenfizi konusunda birbirinden faklı yaklaşım sergilemektedirler. Çalışmamızda kamu düzeni, ticari nitelik ve tahkime elverişlilik konusunda Türk ve İngiliz mahkemelerinin farklı tutumları mukayese edilecek ve değerlendirilecektir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇOĞALAN, M. (2016). İNGİLİZ VE TÜRK HUKUKUNDA YABANCI HAKEM KARARLARININ TANINMASI VE TENFİZİNİN MUKAYESESİ. Uluslararası Ticaret ve Tahkim Hukuku Dergisi, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 433–494. https://ajindex.com/articles/321529

References (7)

  1. Akıncı Ziya, Neden Istanbul Tahkim Merkezi?, YaşarÜHFD, 8, p. 79-95.
  2. Australian Commercial Dispute Centre, ADR Definitions: http://www.acdcltd.com.au/what-is-adr/definitions-of-adr-processes [accessed 1.1.2016]. Ayvaz Sema Taşpınar, 2013, Domestic arbitration and its practice, in: IVXX Solution seeking Conference, 2013,
  3. Ankara, Turkey, 13 March 2013: http://www.intes.org.tr/content/tahkim.pdf [accessed 12.8.2014]. Blackaby Nigel P. and Constantine Partasides, 2009, Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration. 5th ed., Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  4. Blake Susan, Browne Julie, Sime Stuart, 2012. A Practical Approach to Alternative Dispute Resolution. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Born Gary B, 2012. International Arbitration: Law and Practise. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International Briggs Adrian, 2010. Agreements on Jurisdiction and Choice of Law. Law Quarterly Review, 126, p. 331-334. Clarkson Christopher M.V. and Hill Jonathan., 2006. The Conflict of Laws. 3rded. New York: Oxford University Press. Cook Susanne V., 1998. CISG: The Perspective of the practitioner.JLC. 17(0733-2491), p.343-353. Deynekli Adnan, 2013. Problems in Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Turkey (in) In: International conference on Eurasian Economies, 2013,
  5. St. Petersburg, Russia, 17-18 September 2013: www.avecon.info/papers/806.pdf [accessed 22.7.2014]. Dustson Stuart, 2014, Companies in Conflict- navigating the right path. International Arbitration Law review, 17(4), p. 87-89 Ekşi Nuray, 2011, Yargıtay Kararları Işığında ICC Hakem Kararlarının Türkiye’de Tanınması ve Tenfizi (Recognition and Enforcement of ICC arbitral awards under the light of Turkish Supreme Court.) AnkaraBD, 67(1), p. 54-74.
  6. Ekşi Nuray, Milletlerarası Tahkim Kanunu Hakkında Genel Bir Değerlendirme, (2003)1-2 MHB, p. 295-338.
  7. Ekşi Nuray, İngiliz Hukukunda Tahkim ve Denetimi, (1992)24 Argumentum, p. 371-377. Enforcing Arbitration awards in England: Practical Law Company database: http://uk.practicallaw.com/1-363-3952 [accessed 22.7.2016]. Erten Rifat, 2009. İngiliz Tahkim Hukukunda Geçici Hukuki Koruma Yöntemleri (Provisional Measures of Protection under English Arbitration Law). AÜHFD, 58(3), p. 539-578 Eskiyörük Serhat, 2005. The Development of Arbitration Law in Turkey and the Comparison of the New Act with UNCITRAL Model Law, YIMEL, 12, p. 129-140 Finch Robert. 2004, London: still the cornerstone of international commercial arbitration and commercial law, Arbitration, 70(4),