Turkey: Arbitration & Dispute Resolution

Determining the law applicable to the merits of a dispute is one of the most critical aspects of international arbitration. It plays a key role in ensuring that disputes are resolved in a predictable and fair manner and that the arbitral award is ultimately enforceable.

The Olin v. Libya dispute centres on what once looked like a promising investment, a dairy and juice factory established in Libya’s capital, Tripoli during a window of economic openness in Libya. But all that was only temporary optimism. With an environment of mounting political instability, the Government of Libya in 2006 saw fit to expropriate this investment. This was the prelude to a lengthy and complex legal battle spanning years and jurisdictions.

The annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 by Russia triggered the expansion of unilateral sanctions, particularly by the EU and the US. These sanctions, designed to exert political and economic pressure, had significant repercussions for global commerce, extending their effects beyond sanctioning and sanctioned states to third-country nationals. In a globalized economy, no actor remains immune from the disruptions caused by armed conflict and sanctions. This reality raises complex questions for arbitration, especially in third States such as Türkiye, regarding the enforceability of contracts, applicability of foreign mandatory rules, and potential enforcement challenges.

This article explains how a foreign arbitral award is recognised and enforced in Türkiye, with particular attention to the 1958 New York Convention, Türkiye's reciprocity and commercial reservations, the alternative regime in Articles 60 to 63 of the Code on Private International Law and International Civil Procedure No. 5718, and the distinction between enforcement and a forbidden review of the merits. It addresses the competent court, Article IV filing documents, Article V defences, public order, arbitrability, appeal, interim protection and execution against assets.

This article examines court-ordered interim relief in Türkiye where the underlying dispute is subject to arbitration. It distinguishes interim injunctions from interim attachments, explains the role of Article 6 of International Arbitration Law No. 4686, and addresses the separate statutory conditions under the Code of Civil Procedure and the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law. Particular attention is given to foreign-seated arbitrations, tribunal and emergency-arbitrator powers, security, procedural deadlines and the preservation of Turkish assets pending an award or enforcement proceeding.

International commercial contracts often include arbitration clauses to resolve disputes outside traditional court systems. However, parties may challenge the validity of these arbitration provisions, leading courts to examine their enforceability under applicable laws and international conventions. This analysis explores how Turkish courts approach claims of invalidity in cross-border arbitration agreements.

This article examines Turkish debt collection from the perspective of foreign creditors. It considers the choice of recovery route, payment orders, objections, litigation, negotiable instruments, provisional attachment, execution, insolvency and the treatment of foreign documents. The judicial authorities discussed in the text are considered alongside the statutory conditions of the particular procedure.

This article examines the formation, performance and management of contracts involving foreign businesses in Türkiye. It considers governing law, mandatory rules, authority, formalities, language, standard terms, payment arrangements, liability, termination and dispute resolution. Judicial authorities and the legal sources cited in the manuscript are considered in the context of the particular contractual issue.

This article examines the legal and practical considerations that arise when a foreign individual or company instructs counsel in Türkiye. It distinguishes the legal requirement for representation from the broader need to protect a client's procedural and commercial position. The discussion addresses professional registration, independence, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, attorney fees, engagement terms and powers of attorney executed abroad. It also considers the Court of Cassation authority and professional materials cited in the text. The analysis emphasises a clearly defined mandate, proportionate authority, reliable communication and early identification of deadlines, evidence and costs.