Introduction
A dispute resolution clause is one of those contractual provisions that receives relatively little attention when the commercial relationship is going well and a great deal of attention once it is not.
By then, however, many of the important choices have already been made. The parties may have committed themselves to Turkish courts, agreed to arbitration in Istanbul or abroad, created a mandatory negotiation or mediation stage, or left the contract completely silent. The location of the counterparty's assets may also turn out to be very different from the place where the underlying transaction was performed.
For a foreign company dealing with Türkiye, I therefore consider dispute resolution at two different moments.
The first is when the contract is being drafted.
The second is when the dispute actually arises. At the drafting stage, the objective is to construct a mechanism that is legally coherent and commercially realistic.
Once the dispute has arisen, the analysis changes. Counsel must determine what the existing contract actually permits, whether mandatory mediation applies, which court or tribunal has jurisdiction, whether urgent interim relief is needed, where evidence is located, how service will be effected and, perhaps most importantly, where any eventual judgment or award can be enforced.
Turkish law provides three principal routes for private commercial disputes: litigation, arbitration and mediation. None is inherently superior in every case.
The correct mechanism depends on the dispute.
Litigation Before Turkish Courts
Litigation remains the ordinary mechanism for resolving civil and commercial disputes where the parties have not validly selected arbitration or another legally effective mechanism.
Depending on the nature of the dispute, proceedings may fall before courts such as civil courts of first instance, commercial courts, labour courts, consumer courts, intellectual property courts or other specialised courts.
For international disputes, however, the first question is not simply which Turkish court handles commercial cases. It is whether the Turkish courts have international jurisdiction over the particular dispute.
Under Article 40 of Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law, the international jurisdiction of Turkish courts is generally determined by the domestic rules concerning territorial jurisdiction. The same statute contains special rules for particular categories, including employment, consumer and insurance disputes.1
The court analysis should therefore begin with the parties, contract, place of performance, subject matter and any jurisdiction clause.
Can Parties Choose a Foreign Court?
In international commercial contracts, parties sometimes prefer the courts of another country.
Turkish private international law permits this in defined circumstances. Under Article 47 of Law No. 5718, where Turkish territorial jurisdiction is not based on an exclusive jurisdiction rule, parties to an obligation containing a foreign element may agree that disputes will be heard by the courts of a foreign state, subject to the statutory conditions.
Certain protective jurisdiction rules, including those concerning employment, consumer and insurance disputes, cannot simply be displaced by agreement.2
This distinction matters when foreign companies use global contract templates. A jurisdiction clause that is effective in an ordinary business-to-business agreement may not operate in the same manner in a consumer or employment relationship.
The correct analysis therefore requires examining both the wording of the clause and the legal character of the underlying relationship.
A Foreign Claimant May Face a Security Requirement
This is a practical point foreign clients frequently do not know about until proceedings are about to begin. Under Article 48 of Law No. 5718, foreign natural persons and foreign legal entities bringing proceedings, intervening in proceedings or commencing enforcement in Türkiye are generally required to provide security for procedural costs and possible losses of the opposing party.
The court must, however, exempt the foreign party where the applicable reciprocity requirement is satisfied. International treaty arrangements may also affect the position. The Ministry of Justice specifically identifies this foreign-status security obligation and the reciprocity exemption in its official international judicial cooperation guidance.3
This should be investigated before litigation is commenced. It can affect both timing and the initial cost of proceedings.
A foreign claimant should therefore ask Turkish counsel at the beginning:
Will security be required in my case, and does a reciprocity or treaty exemption apply?
Service Abroad Can Determine the Litigation Timeline
In cross-border proceedings, one of the most underestimated procedural issues is service. A Turkish lawsuit against a foreign defendant may require judicial documents to be transmitted abroad. Conversely, documents originating in proceedings outside Türkiye may need to be served in Türkiye.
The 1965 Hague Service Convention provides an international mechanism for service between contracting states. Türkiye is a contracting party and has made specific declarations regarding the Convention. In particular, Türkiye objects to the alternative methods of service contained in Article 10. The Ministry of Justice acts within the relevant international judicial cooperation structure.4
For international clients, this means that a service method that appears routine in another jurisdiction should not automatically be assumed to work in Türkiye.
Incorrect service can affect procedural validity, default judgments and later recognition or enforcement.
Before filing, counsel should therefore identify:
the defendant's correct legal identity, registered address, applicable treaty framework, translation requirements and expected route of service.
In a substantial international dispute, service strategy is part of litigation strategy.
Litigation Should Be Considered Together With Enforcement
Winning a case is not the same as collecting the judgment. If the defendant and its principal assets are located in Türkiye, a Turkish judgment may provide a direct route into Turkish enforcement proceedings once the relevant legal requirements are satisfied.
If the defendant's assets are primarily outside Türkiye, the claimant should investigate whether and how a Turkish judgment will be recognised and enforced in the relevant foreign jurisdiction.
The opposite situation also arises frequently. A foreign company may already have obtained a judgment abroad and then discover that the defendant's assets are located in Türkiye.
Recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments in Türkiye are principally governed by Articles 50 to 59 of Law No. 5718, subject to applicable international treaties.5
For this reason, the likely place of enforcement should influence the original choice between litigation and arbitration.
When Arbitration May Be a Better Choice
Arbitration is particularly relevant to cross-border transactions where parties seek a neutral forum, specialised decision makers, greater procedural flexibility or an award capable of benefiting from an international enforcement convention.
International arbitration connected with Türkiye may be governed by International Arbitration Law No. 4686, while domestic arbitration is principally regulated by Articles 407 to 444 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100.
The Ministry of Trade's current 2026 formal arbitration guide identifies these as the principal Turkish statutory frameworks.6
For a foreign company, arbitration may deserve particular consideration where:
- significant assets are located in several jurisdictions
- technical expertise is important
- the parties want control over the language of proceedings
- neutrality of forum is commercially important
- confidentiality is important and supported by the chosen rules
- the contract is long term and international; or
recognition and enforcement of the resulting award are expected in another contracting state.
These are considerations, not automatic reasons to select arbitration. Arbitration can also involve substantial tribunal fees, institutional charges, expert costs and legal fees. A relatively modest domestic receivables dispute may therefore be more efficiently pursued in court.
The New York Convention Is a Major Enforcement Advantage
Türkiye acceded to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards on 2 July 1992. It entered into force for Türkiye on 30 September 1992.
Türkiye applies the Convention subject to its reciprocity and commercial reservations.7 For international businesses, this is one of arbitration's most important structural advantages.
A qualifying arbitral award can benefit from a widely adopted treaty framework for recognition and enforcement across contracting states.
This does not mean that enforcement is automatic. Recognition and enforcement proceedings may still be required, and the Convention contains defined grounds upon which enforcement can be refused.
Nevertheless, the existence of a common international framework can make arbitration particularly attractive where the counterparty's assets are distributed internationally.
ISTAC as a Turkish Institutional Option
The Istanbul Arbitration Centre, ISTAC, offers institutional arbitration for domestic and international disputes. Its Arbitration and Mediation Rules entered into force in 2015, and ISTAC's official rules page includes a 2022 update. ISTAC also provides Fast Track Arbitration, an Emergency Arbitrator mechanism and other procedural tools.8
Under ISTAC's currently published Fast Track rules, disputes not exceeding TRY 5 million may be resolved through a sole arbitrator under the expedited framework, with a contemplated three-month period for the final award.9
The threshold should always be checked when proceedings commence because institutional rules and monetary amounts can change. For foreign companies with a substantial Turkish connection, ISTAC can therefore be considered alongside international institutions rather than treated as an option only for domestic parties.
Yargıtay: An Arbitration Clause Must Be Clear
Recent Court of Cassation jurisprudence strongly supports careful arbitration drafting.
Yargıtay General Assembly of Civil Chambers: E. 2023/688, K. 2023/1348, 21 December 2023
The General Assembly emphasised that because arbitration removes a dispute from ordinary state adjudication, the parties' intention to arbitrate must be expressed clearly, definitively and without uncertainty.
The decision is discussed in the Ministry of Justice's formal publication Adalet Dergisi.10
This is an important principle for international contracting. An arbitration clause should not require a future court to guess whether the parties intended arbitration at all.
Yargıtay 11th Civil Chamber: E. 2023/5030, K. 2024/6919, 30 September 2024
This decision provides an even more practical warning. The contract contained inconsistent dispute resolution provisions. One clause referred to ICC arbitration in Paris, while another incorporated a different set of conditions capable of pointing toward another arbitral framework.
Yargıtay concluded that the arrangement was not sufficiently clear concerning the seat and applicable arbitration framework. The lower court therefore should not simply have dismissed the action on the basis of the arbitration objection.11
For contract drafters, the lesson is straightforward:
Do not build a dispute resolution clause by combining provisions from unrelated precedents. A shorter coherent clause is safer than a longer contradictory one.
Mediation Is Now a Central Part of Turkish Civil Procedure
Mediation in Türkiye is governed principally by Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes. The system includes both voluntary mediation and mediation that operates as a statutory precondition to litigation.
The important point for a foreign client is that mandatory mediation is now considerably broader than many older summaries of Turkish procedure suggest.
Commercial disputes
Under the current form of Article 5/A of the Turkish Commercial Code, mediation is a condition of bringing specified commercial actions involving:
- monetary receivables
- compensation
- cancellation of objection
- negative declaratory actions; and
- restitution
The current wording resulted from the 2023 amendment introduced by Law No. 7445 and has applied since 1 September 2023.12 This is broader than the earlier rule, which focused principally on claims for payment and compensation.
Labour disputes
Under Article 3 of Labour Courts Law No. 7036, mediation is a condition of action for many employee and employer receivables and compensation disputes and reinstatement claims, subject to the statutory scope and exceptions.
The Ministry of Justice confirms that the requirement applies before proceedings are commenced in the defined labour categories.13
Other categories
Law No. 7445 also introduced Article 18/B of Law No. 6325.
Since 1 September 2023, mandatory mediation has extended to defined disputes concerning:
- tenancy relationships, subject to the statutory enforcement exception
- partition and dissolution of co-ownership
- condominium law; and
- neighbour
The legislation is particularly relevant to foreign investors and property owners because a Turkish real estate dispute may therefore be subject to mandatory mediation before the court can examine the merits.14
Missing Mandatory Mediation Can End the Lawsuit Before the Merits Are Heard
This is not merely an administrative formality. Under Article 18/A of Law No. 6325, where mediation is a statutory condition of action and the claimant has not first applied to mediation, the court dismisses the action procedurally for absence of a condition of action.
Where mediation has taken place but the final record has simply not been attached to the lawsuit, the statute provides a procedure for completing that documentary deficiency.
The Ministry of Justice expressly distinguishes between these situations in its official guidance.15 For a foreign company, the distinction matters because a claimant may have a strong substantive claim and nevertheless lose time and incur unnecessary cost because the procedural route was incorrect.
Before filing any Turkish commercial action, counsel should ask: Is mediation a condition of action for this particular claim?
Yargıtay: Not Every Commercial Transaction Creates a Commercial Case
Determining whether mandatory commercial mediation applies requires identifying whether the contemplated action is legally a commercial case. That is not always the same as asking whether the underlying transaction was commercial in an ordinary business sense.
The Ministry of Justice's formal training publication on commercial mediation cites Yargıtay 15th Civil Chamber, E. 2016/5445, K. 2017/4129, 27 November 2017, and Yargıtay General Assembly of Civil Chambers, E. 2017/1658, K. 2017/1464, 29 November 2017, for the distinction between a commercial transaction and a commercial lawsuit.
The jurisprudence confirms, in substance, that merely characterising an activity as a commercial transaction does not automatically make every resulting lawsuit a commercial case. The statutory criteria under the Turkish Commercial Code must be examined.16
This matters directly to Article 5/A. Before deciding that mandatory commercial mediation applies, counsel should classify the lawsuit correctly.
Mediation Is More Than a Procedural Requirement
The commercial value of mediation should not be reduced to satisfying a condition before litigation.
It can be useful where parties want to preserve an ongoing relationship. Distributorships, joint ventures, long-term supply arrangements, construction projects and shareholder relationships often involve disputes where both sides still have commercial reasons to continue working together.
Mediation may also allow outcomes that a court or tribunal would not ordinarily impose.
A judge generally determines legal rights and remedies. A negotiated settlement may address payment schedules, revised delivery obligations, future pricing, restructuring, release arrangements or continuation of another contract.
That flexibility can have significant business value.
Mediation under Law No. 6325 is also subject to statutory confidentiality principles.17
A Mediation Settlement Can Have Significant Enforcement Effect
The legal effect of a settlement document should be considered when the settlement is drafted. Under Article 18 of Law No. 6325, certain mediation settlement agreements can acquire the status of a document equivalent to a court judgment.
Following the 2023 reform, where statutory signature conditions are satisfied, a commercial mediation settlement signed by the lawyers and the mediator may constitute an enforceable judgment-like document without requiring a separate enforceability annotation, except where the law specifically requires such an annotation.18
The exact signature and enforceability requirements should therefore be checked before parties assume that every informal mediation memorandum can immediately be enforced.
Settlement drafting deserves the same care as contract drafting.
International Mediation: The Singapore Convention
This is an important development for foreign companies. Türkiye is a party to the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, commonly known as the Singapore Convention on Mediation.
Türkiye signed the Convention on 7 August 2019, ratified it on 11 October 2021, and the Convention entered into force for Türkiye on 11 April 2022.19
Law No. 7445 subsequently introduced Article 17/A into Law No. 6325, creating the domestic procedural mechanism for international settlement agreements falling within the Convention.
Under Article 17/A, the application for an enforceability annotation is made to the competent commercial court of first instance, within the statutory jurisdictional framework.20
This creates an additional reason for international companies to consider mediation seriously. For an appropriate cross-border commercial dispute, mediation is no longer simply a private negotiation mechanism. A qualifying international settlement may benefit from a multilateral enforcement framework.
Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses Need Precision
Sophisticated international contracts increasingly use clauses such as:
negotiation, followed by mediation, followed by arbitration. The concept is attractive.
The drafting is where problems arise. A clause that requires management to "negotiate in good faith for a reasonable period" leaves several questions unanswered.
Who must negotiate? When does the period start? How is failure documented? When may arbitration begin? Does an urgent application for interim relief bypass the earlier stages? What happens if one party refuses to attend?
Where parties genuinely want an escalation mechanism, I prefer objective triggers. For example, the contract might specify written notice of dispute, a fixed number of days for executive negotiation, a defined mediation period and a clear date after which arbitration may be commenced.
An escalation provision should reduce uncertainty, not create another dispute about whether the parties complied with the escalation provision.
Interim Relief May Determine Which Route Is Practical
Sometimes the immediate problem is more important than the final forum. A party may need to prevent disposal of assets, protect evidence, stop drawing under a guarantee, preserve contractual rights or maintain the status quo.
Turkish courts possess statutory powers to grant interim relief where the relevant legal requirements are established. Arbitration does not necessarily remove the courts from this analysis. International Arbitration Law No. 4686 recognises a role for both tribunals and courts in relation to interim measures, with limitations on the tribunal's ability to use coercive state authority.21
An international contract should therefore not be drafted as though choosing arbitration means Turkish courts will never become relevant.
They may become essential at the most urgent stage of the dispute.
Is Arbitration Always Better for a Foreign Company?
No. I would be cautious of any advice stating that foreign companies should automatically choose arbitration. Consider a straightforward unpaid invoice claim against a Turkish company with all of its assets in Türkiye.
If the legal and factual issues are uncomplicated, Turkish court proceedings and enforcement may be commercially more proportionate than a three-member international arbitration.
Now consider a large engineering contract between parties from different countries, performed in several jurisdictions, involving technical evidence and assets located internationally.
The balance may shift strongly toward arbitration. The correct comparison should address:
the amount at stake, complexity, technical expertise, expected evidence, confidentiality, urgency, cost, likely appeal or annulment mechanisms, location of assets and international enforceability.
The forum should fit the dispute profile.
- Disputes Involving the Turkish State Require Separate Analysis
A foreign company should not assume that every dispute involving a public entity is an ordinary commercial dispute. Depending on the nature of the contract and governmental activity, questions of administrative jurisdiction may arise.
Türkiye's constitutional framework also permits arbitration in defined public service concession arrangements, while qualifying foreign investments may potentially raise separate treaty protection questions.
The Ministry of Trade's current arbitration publication discusses arbitration within the constitutional and investment framework, including Article 125 of the Constitution.22
Investor-state arbitration should therefore be analysed separately from ordinary contractual commercial arbitration.
What Should a Foreign Client Look for in a Dispute Resolution Lawyer in Türkiye?
For an international client, the lawyer's title alone does not establish that the lawyer has the right experience for the dispute.
Litigation, arbitration and mediation require overlapping but different skills.
A foreign client should consider whether counsel has meaningful experience in:
- Turkish commercial litigation
- jurisdiction and private international law
- interim measures
- international service and evidence
- arbitration under the institution selected in the contract
- recognition and enforcement
- mandatory mediation
- settlement drafting; and
- the commercial sector
For a cross-border matter, I would also ask a very practical question:
Does the lawyer think about enforcement at the beginning of the case? If the answer is no, an important part of the strategy may be missing. Foreign clients should also establish:
who will actually manage the matter, whether senior counsel will remain involved, what language will be used, how translations will be handled, how foreign counsel will be coordinated, how experts will be selected and how litigation, arbitration and external costs will be budgeted.
A Turkish attorney's professional registration can be verified through the official Türkiye Barolar Birliği Baro Levhası / Avukat Arama database.23
If mediation is contemplated, the Ministry of Justice also maintains an official registry of mediators.24 Experienced dispute counsel should be willing to recommend settlement when settlement makes commercial sense.
The measure of good dispute advice is not how quickly proceedings are filed.
It is whether the chosen strategy protects the client's legal and commercial position.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is arbitration always better than Turkish court litigation for a foreign company?
No. Arbitration may be particularly attractive for technically complex or cross-border disputes and where international enforcement is important. A straightforward dispute against a Turkish counterparty with assets in Türkiye may, however, be more proportionately handled through Turkish litigation.
Can a foreign company sue directly in a Turkish commercial court?
Potentially yes, subject to jurisdiction, procedural requirements and any applicable arbitration agreement. Foreign claimants should also check whether security under Article 48 of Law No. 5718 is required or whether an exemption applies.25
Must a commercial claimant go to mediation before filing in Türkiye?
For the commercial cases specified in Article 5/A of the Turkish Commercial Code, yes. The current scope includes monetary receivable, compensation, cancellation of objection, negative declaratory and restitution actions.26
What happens if mandatory mediation is skipped?
If mediation is legally a condition of action and the claimant never applied to mediation, the lawsuit is dismissed procedurally without examination of the merits.27
Does mandatory mediation apply to rental disputes?
Many tenancy disputes are subject to mandatory mediation under Article 18/B of Law No. 6325, subject to the statutory exception concerning specified eviction proceedings under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law.28
Can foreign parties choose ISTAC arbitration?
Yes. ISTAC administers both domestic and international disputes and its services are available to foreign parties.29
Can the parties use English in an arbitration seated in Türkiye?
International arbitration allows considerable party autonomy concerning procedural matters, including language, subject to the applicable law and selected institutional rules. The language should be stated clearly in the arbitration clause.30
Is an arbitration clause copied from another contract safe to use?
Not necessarily. Recent Yargıtay jurisprudence demonstrates that inconsistent references to different institutions, rules or seats may create uncertainty serious enough to undermine reliance on the arbitration objection.31
Are foreign arbitral awards automatically enforceable in Türkiye?
No. Recognition and enforcement proceedings may still be required. Qualifying awards benefit from the New York Convention, subject to its limited refusal grounds and procedural requirements.32
Can an international mediation settlement be enforced in Türkiye?
Potentially yes. Türkiye is a party to the Singapore Convention, and Law No. 6325 Article 17/A provides the Turkish procedural mechanism for settlement agreements falling within the Convention.33
Can we require negotiation and mediation before arbitration?
Yes, parties may construct a multi-tier dispute resolution clause. The stages, notice mechanism, time periods and consequences of non-participation should be drafted clearly.
How should a foreign company choose a Turkish dispute lawyer?
Look beyond general litigation experience. Consider experience with the relevant dispute type, cross-border jurisdiction, interim measures, arbitration, mediation, enforcement, foreign documents and the industry involved. Verify the attorney through the official Türkiye Barolar Birliği registry.34
When should dispute counsel be contacted?
Ideally before the contract is signed. Once a dispute exists, counsel should be contacted before important notices are sent, evidence is lost, assets move, mediation deadlines are missed or proceedings are commenced in the wrong forum.
Conclusion
Choosing between litigation, arbitration and mediation is not an abstract preference. It is a question of legal architecture. Litigation may offer the most direct route where the dispute and assets are located in Türkiye. Arbitration may be more suitable where neutrality, technical expertise or international enforcement are important. Mediation may preserve commercial relationships and, in many Turkish disputes, is now a statutory condition before litigation can begin.
For foreign companies, additional issues must also be considered. International jurisdiction, foreign claimant security, overseas service, recognition and enforcement, language, asset location and the interaction between Turkish proceedings and proceedings elsewhere may materially affect the strategy. Recent Yargıtay decisions add another clear lesson: dispute resolution provisions should express the parties' intentions with precision. A defective clause can turn the dispute resolution mechanism itself into the first dispute. For that reason, I regard the best time to resolve a dispute resolution problem as the moment the commercial contract is drafted.
The second best time is before the first procedural step is taken.
Footnotes
1 Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law, arts. 40 to 48. Official Gazette No. 26728, 12 December 2007. Official Gazette statutory text. See also Ministry of Justice, “Yabancıların Teminat Yatırma Yükümlülüğü”.
2 Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law, arts. 40 to 48. Official Gazette No. 26728, 12 December 2007. Official Gazette statutory text. See also Ministry of Justice, “Yabancıların Teminat Yatırma Yükümlülüğü”.
3 Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law, arts. 40 to 48. Official Gazette No. 26728, 12 December 2007. Official Gazette statutory text. See also Ministry of Justice, “Yabancıların Teminat Yatırma Yükümlülüğü”.
4 Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters. HCCH, official status table and Türkiye declarations.
5 Law No. 5718, arts. 50 to 63. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Justice, Hukukî Konularda Uluslararası Adlî İş Birliği Mevzuatı.
6 International Arbitration Law No. 4686; Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, arts. 407 to 444. Ministry of Trade, Tahkime İlişkin Temel Kavramlar, Düzenlemeler ve Güncel Gelişmeler, updated and expanded 3rd ed., 2026.
7 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, New York, 1958. UNCITRAL, official treaty status. Türkiye accession: 2 July 1992; entry into force: 30 September 1992; reciprocity and commercial reservations.
8 Law No. 6570 on the Istanbul Arbitration Centre. ISTAC, Arbitration Rules and 2022 update; Fast Track Arbitration rules; institutional information.
9 Law No. 6570 on the Istanbul Arbitration Centre. ISTAC, Arbitration Rules and 2022 update; Fast Track Arbitration rules; institutional information.
10 Yargıtay General Assembly of Civil Chambers, E. 2023/688, K. 2023/1348, 21 December 2023; Yargıtay 11th Civil Chamber, E. 2023/5030, K. 2024/6919, 30 September 2024. Discussed in Ministry of Justice, Adalet Dergisi, Issue 75, 2025.
11 Yargıtay General Assembly of Civil Chambers, E. 2023/688, K. 2023/1348, 21 December 2023; Yargıtay 11th Civil
Chamber, E. 2023/5030, K. 2024/6919, 30 September 2024. Discussed in Ministry of Justice, Adalet Dergisi, Issue 75, 2025.
12 Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, art. 5/A, as amended by Law No. 7445, concerning mandatory mediation in specified commercial actions. Official Gazette, 5 April 2023.
13 Labour Courts Law No. 7036, art. 3. Ministry of Justice, official explanation of mediation as a condition of action in labour disputes.
14 Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, particularly arts. 17/A, 18, 18/A and 18/B; Law No. 7445, Official Gazette No. 32154, 5 April 2023. Official Gazette amendment text.
15 Ministry of Justice, Mediation Department, official guidance on mandatory mediation and official mediator registry.
16 Yargıtay 15th Civil Chamber, E. 2016/5445, K. 2017/4129, 27 November 2017; Yargıtay General Assembly of Civil Chambers, E. 2017/19- 1658, K. 2017/1464, 29 November 2017. Ministry of Justice, Ticari Uyuşmazlıklarda Dava Şartı Arabuluculuk.
17 Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, particularly arts. 17/A, 18, 18/A and 18/B; Law No. 7445, Official Gazette No. 32154, 5 April 2023. Official Gazette amendment text.
18 Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, particularly arts. 17/A, 18, 18/A and 18/B; Law No. 7445, Official Gazette No. 32154, 5 April 2023. Official Gazette amendment text.
19 United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, Singapore Convention on Mediation. UNCITRAL, official treaty status. Türkiye signature: 7 August 2019; ratification: 11 October 2021; entry into force: 11 April 2022.
20 Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, particularly arts. 17/A, 18, 18/A and 18/B; Law No. 7445, Official Gazette No. 32154, 5 April 2023. Official Gazette amendment text.
21 International Arbitration Law No. 4686; Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, arts. 407 to 444. Ministry of Trade, Tahkime İlişkin Temel Kavramlar, Düzenlemeler ve Güncel Gelişmeler, updated and expanded 3rd ed., 2026.
22 International Arbitration Law No. 4686; Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, arts. 407 to 444. Ministry of Trade, Tahkime İlişkin Temel Kavramlar, Düzenlemeler ve Güncel Gelişmeler, updated and expanded 3rd ed., 2026.
23 Türkiye Barolar Birliği, Baro Levhası / Avukat Arama, official professional registry.
24 Ministry of Justice, Mediation Department, official guidance on mandatory mediation and official mediator registry.
25 Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law, arts. 40 to 48. Official Gazette No. 26728, 12 December 2007. Official Gazette statutory text. See also Ministry of Justice, “Yabancıların Teminat Yatırma Yükümlülüğü”.
26 Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, art. 5/A, as amended by Law No. 7445, concerning mandatory mediation in specified commercial actions. Official Gazette, 5 April 2023.
27 Ministry of Justice, Mediation Department, official guidance on mandatory mediation and official mediator registry.
28 Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, particularly arts. 17/A, 18, 18/A and 18/B; Law No. 7445, Official Gazette No. 32154, 5 April 2023. Official Gazette amendment text.
29 Law No. 6570 on the Istanbul Arbitration Centre. ISTAC, Arbitration Rules and 2022 update; Fast Track Arbitration rules; institutional information.
30 International Arbitration Law No. 4686; Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, arts. 407 to 444. Ministry of Trade, Tahkime İlişkin Temel Kavramlar, Düzenlemeler ve Güncel Gelişmeler, updated and expanded 3rd ed., 2026.
31 Yargıtay General Assembly of Civil Chambers, E. 2023/688, K. 2023/1348, 21 December 2023; Yargıtay 11th Civil Chamber, E. 2023/5030, K. 2024/6919, 30 September 2024. Discussed in Ministry of Justice, Adalet Dergisi, Issue 75, 2025.
32 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, New York, 1958. UNCITRAL, official treaty status. Türkiye accession: 2 July 1992; entry into force: 30 September 1992; reciprocity and commercial reservations.
33 United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, Singapore Convention on Mediation. UNCITRAL, official treaty status. Türkiye signature: 7 August 2019; ratification: 11 October 2021; entry into force: 11 April 2022.Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, particularly arts. 17/A, 18, 18/A and 18/B; Law No. 7445, Official Gazette No. 32154, 5 April 2023. Official Gazette amendment text.
34 Türkiye Barolar Birliği, Baro Levhası / Avukat Arama, official professional registry.
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.
