Principle of bona fides is in force for the jurisdiction objections based on choice-of-foreign court agreements. However, rejection of a jurisdiction objection, raised in accordance with the rules of law and by the parties who had granted jurisdiction to a foreign court by their mutual choice-of-court agreement within the freedom of contract and upon the authority that was granted by rules of law, without depending on any other concrete reason, just depending on the hypothesis that defendant can use his rights of defense more effective, is not justifiable. On the contrary, the party’s conduct that raised such an objection does not constitute a paradoxical conduct and is consistent with the previous conduct to grant jurisdiction to a foreign court. Therefore the decision of Court of Cassation’s that neutralizes the choice-of-foreign court agreements and that connotes the return of Court of Cassation’s decision of 1988 should not be followed.
The principle of bona fides is in force for the jurisdiction objections based on choice-of-foreign court agreements. However, the rejection of a jurisdiction objection, raised in accordance with the rules of law and by the parties who had granted jurisdiction to a foreign court by their mutual choice-of-court agreement within the freedom of contract and upon the authority that was granted by rules of law, without depending on any other concrete reason, just depending on the hypothesis that the defendant can use his rights of defense more effectively, is not justifiable. On the contrary, the party’s conduct that raised such an objection does not constitute a paradoxical conduct and is consistent with the previous conduct to grant jurisdiction to a foreign court. Therefore the decision of the Court of Cassation that neutralizes the choice-of-foreign court agreements and that connotes the return of the Court of Cassation's decision of 1988 should not be followed.
Alan : Hukuk
Dergi Türü : Uluslararası
Benzer Makaleler | Yazar | # |
---|
Makale | Yazar | # |
---|