Citation Number
2
Views
54
Downloands
14
Milletlerarası ticari tahkimin en temel özelliklerinden biri taraf iradesine verilen önemdir. Taraf iradesi hem tahkim yargılaması devam ederken hem de yargılamanın sona erip hakem kararının devlet mahkemesi tarafından denetlendiği aşamada gözetilmektedir. Milletlerarası Tahkim Kanunu m 15’de hakem kararlarına karşı iptal davası açma imkânı tanınmış ve taraf iradesine verilen önemin bir yansıması olarak bu haktan kısmen veya tamamen feragat edilebileceği düzenlenmiştir. MTK m 15’de düzenlenen iptal davasından feragatin koşulları karşılaştırmalı hukukla paralel olmakla beraber, sonuçları itibariyle karşılaştırmalı hukuktan ayrılmaktadır. Özellikle iptal davası açma hakkından feragat edilmesi ve kararın Türkiye’de icra edilecek olması halinde taraflara sağlanan hukuki koruma yetersiz kalmakta ve ortaya çıkan bu sonuç adil yargılanma hakkına aykırılık teşkil etmektedir. Çalışmamızda, Milletlerarası Tahkim Kanunu m 15’de yer alan iptal davasından peşinen feragat imkânı, karşılaştırmalı hukuktaki yaklaşımlar dikkate alınarak incelenmekte ve adil yargılanma hakkı ihlalinin giderilmesi için çözüm önerileri sunulmaktadır. Çalışmamızda ayrıca iptal davasında mahkemelerin denetim yetkilerinin taraf iradesi ile genişletilip genişletilemeyeceği yine karşılaştırmalı hukuktaki yaklaşımlar dikkate alınarak irdelenmektedir.
One of the most fundamental characteristics of international trade arbitration is the importance given to the party’s will. The will of the party is monitored both as the arbitration trial continues and as the trial ends and the judgment of the arbitrator is reviewed by the state court. The International Arbitration Act m15 recognizes the possibility of the cancellation of the judgment against the judgment and, as a reflection of the importance given to the party’s will, provides that this right may be partially or entirely rejected. The conditions of feragatin from the cancellation case held in MTK m15 are parallel to the comparative law, but the results are separated from the comparative law. In particular, the right to withdraw from the cancellation proceedings and the legal protection provided to the parties in the event that the decision is to be executed in Turkey remains insufficient, and the result that arises constitutes a violation of the right to fair trial. In our study, the possibility of withdrawal pursuant to the cancellation case set out in International Arbitration Act m15 is examined taking into account the approaches in the comparative law and proposed solutions for the removal of the infringement of the right to fair trial. Our study also takes into account the comparative approaches in the law that the jurisdiction of the courts in the case of cancellation cannot be extended by the will of the parties.
Party-autonomy is considered to be an overriding principle throughout the arbitral process and post-award stage. Thus, parties are entitled to agree to restrict the review of the arbitral award by the courts in annulment proceedings, either partially or fully excluding the review by the courts according to Turkish International Arbitration Law Article 15. Conditions of such limitation, which are set out in Article 15 align with other legal systems; however, consequences of waiver of annulment proceedings differ significantly. Legal protection provided to parties becomes insufficient if the award is enforced in Turkey to the extent that this shortcoming violates the right to a fair trial. This paper examines the waiver of annulment agreement in Turkish law in comparison with legal systems that parties have been provided with regards to the party-autonomy principle and proposes to have solutions for the violation of the right to a fair trial. Furthermore, it examines the effects of parties’ agreements to expand the review of the arbitral award under Turkish law in light of comparative law.
Field : Hukuk
Journal Type : Ulusal
Article Detail 
Citation Owners
Similar Articles
Download PDF
Journal Information
Listen Paper
Print This Page
Share
Mendeley
