Turkish Supreme Court's jurisprudence tends towards a
narrow interpretation of public policy. Majority of the admitted
public policy defense were constructed on the following arguments:
violation against the equal treatment of the parties and their
right to be heard; judgments against morals; and awards that
violate international public policy.
There are two main instruments which govern the enforcement of
international arbitral awards in Turkey. These are International
Private and Procedure Law ("IPPL") and New York
Convention; whereby the former applies only if the origin of the
award is a non-contracting State to New York Convention or the
dispute is of a non-commercial nature. However, there are no
significant discrepancies between Article 5 of the New York
Convention and the relevant provisions of IPPL concerning the
grounds for refusing the enforcement of an international arbitral
award. That said, while the New York Convention grants national
courts the discretion to enforce an award despite the existence of
grounds for refusal, IPPL stipulates that the competent court shall
reject the enforcement in the presence of any grounds specified
The party initiating the enforcement proceedings must provide:
the original or a duly certified copy of the arbitration agreement
and the original or a duly certified copy of the arbitral award
which has duly become final and executable or is binding upon the
parties. If these documents are in a language other than Turkish,
it is also required to provide their official translations.
The Supreme Court's jurisprudence tends towards a narrow
interpretation of public policy, though that was not the case in
the past. The majority of the claims that have been previously
admitted in relation to public policy defence were constructed on
the following arguments: violation against the equal treatment of
the parties and their right to be heard; judgments against morals;
and awards that violate international public policy.
Under Turkish law, enforcement of arbitral awards is subject to
simplified proceedings which, compared to written proceedings, take
a relatively shorter period, whereby there shall be no joinder and
rejoinder petition stages; together with implementation of other
time-saving rules of procedure. However, on average, enforcement
procedures still take two to three years together with the appeal
This article first appeared in the second Edition of Global
Legal Insights–International Arbitration; published by Global
Legal Group Ltd, London.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
In a judgment harking back to the principles in Donoghue v Stevenson, the Court of Appeal has upheld the High Court's decision that the manufacturer of a defective product installed to prevent fire was not liable...
Once the government notifies the European Council that the UK has decided to leave the EU, the two-year period for the negotiation for exit under Article 50 of the Treaty of the European Union will start.
A year-long arbitration pilot scheme to provide a cost-effective, straightforward and quick method of solving legal disputes between claimants and participating members of the press commenced on the 26th July 2016.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).