TURKEY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Mehmet Karlı, Selim Can Bilgin, Tolga Bayrak and Gülnur Ceylan, Kabine Law Office
What this means for parties doing business with or within Türkiye Individually, none of these developments would nec - essarily alter Türkiye’s standing as a seat or enforce - ment jurisdiction. Collectively, they tell a more impor - tant story: Türkiye is becoming more active, more deliberate and more coherent in its approach to arbi - tration. A few practical takeaways follow for parties structur - ing cross-border transactions touching Türkiye: • Expect OIC - AC clauses in contracts with Turkish state - linked entities : Counterparties with a prefer - ence for another institution should address this early in negotiations, as the Circular is likely to make OIC-AC clauses a more common starting point in this category of contracts. • Public policy objections are a much narrower shield than they used to be : Parties should not expect Turkish courts to treat a domestic criminal com - plaint, evidentiary disagreements or procedural objections to the tribunal’s approach as a basis for reopening the merits at the enforcement stage. • Raise objections early and on the record : The courts’ growing willingness to treat silence as a
waiver means that jurisdictional objections, arbitra - tor-independence concerns and authority-related objections may be lost if they are not raised during the arbitration itself. • Consider Turkish - situs assets early in the enforce- ment strategy : Recent case law suggests that provisional attachment is available at an earlier stage, provided the creditor is prepared to post reasonable security. • ICSID award creditors now have a more certain and workable enforcement route : In the absence of dedicated implementing legislation, recent appel - late guidance provides a practical roadmap for where to apply and how Turkish courts are likely to approach their review. Türkiye remains a jurisdiction that requires care - ful, fact-specific analysis, and none of these devel - opments removes the need for fact-specific local advice. The direction is nevertheless clear: the legal framework governing arbitration in Türkiye is becom - ing more predictable, from the drafting of arbitration agreements to the recognition, enforcement and judi - cial supervision of arbitral awards.
1040 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook