TÜRKIYE Law and Practice Contributed by: Türker Yıldırım, Semih Sander, Gülistan Baltacı Hatay and Selçuk Sencer Esenyel, Esenyel|Partners Lawyers & Consultants
of foreign law by the competent foreign court or arbi - tration panel abroad to the substantive proceedings. 7.5 Domestic Arbitration Institutes Türkiye does not have a domestic arbitration institute that specialises in maritime claims, although the Istan - bul Arbitration Centre has a shortlist of maritime law specialists for handling maritime claims. 7.6 Remedies Where Proceedings Are Commenced in Breach of Foreign Jurisdiction or Arbitration Clauses The defendant can raise a “lack of jurisdiction” objec - tion, which would be considered a preliminary objec - tion that requires the court’s immediate attention and decision. 8. Ship-Owners’ Income Tax Relief 8.1 Exemptions or Tax Reliefs on the Income of Ship-Owners’ Companies Pursuant to Article 12 of the Law on the TISR, income generated by the operations or from the transfer of vessels and yachts registered with the TISR are exempt from corporate income tax. Owners of such vessels and yachts are only obliged to pay registry fees and annual tonnage tax. However, if the vessel or the yacht is classed with Turkish Loyd (Türk Loydu), these amounts will be reduced by 50%. Transactions relating to vessels and yachts registered with the TISR – including sale, purchase, mortgage, registration, financing, chartering, time charter, and all freight con - tracts – are exempt from stamp tax and fees. Amounts received in connection with such transactions are also exempt from banking and insurance transaction tax and from any applicable funds. 9. Implications of Non-Performance, IMO 2020, Trade Sanctions and International Conflict 9.1 Force Majeure and Frustration Articles 136 and 137 of the TCO regulate partial and total impossibility of performance. Article 138 deals with cases where performance is still possible but has become excessively burdensome due to unforeseen
extraordinary events. Whether events, causes or cir - cumstances resulting in non-performance of a ship - ping contract constitute force majeure or frustration must be assessed by the court for each dispute. Turkish courts have dealt with many matters concern - ing the non-performance of contractual obligations. There are precedents where Turkish courts have con - sidered the following circumstances as force majeure or frustration: • severe sea and weather conditions in Karadeniz Ereğli; • flooding in Mersin resulting from a natural disaster; • heavy wind, waves and current conditions at the Bosphorus; and • civil war at the port of discharge. 9.2 Enforcement of the IMO 2020 Rule Limiting the Sulphur Content of Fuel Oil MARPOL is in force in Türkiye. IMO 2020, which regu - lates the global upper limit on the sulphur content of fuel oil used by vessels, is set out under MARPOL Annex VI. As Türkiye is a party to MARPOL and all its annexed protocols, IMO 2020 is implemented accord - ingly. The limit under MARPOL VI, which is 0.5%, is imple - mented in Turkish territorial waters, although a lower limit of 0.1% would apply in certain scenarios. For vessels in Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECAs), the limit is 0.1%, and the entire Mediterranean Sea up to the Dardanelles has been designated as a SECA. Port authorities and therefore the related ministry are the responsible authorities to enforce the MARPOL VI limits. Recently, disputes arising from the use of substandard fuel oil have increased. In the event of pollution, the vessel and the relevant coastal facility are jointly liable for compensating all damage arising from the pollution. Moreover, admin - istrative sanctions (such as administrative fines) are imposed on parties causing environmental pollution. 9.3 Trade Sanctions Türkiye has not incorporated international trade sanc - tions as part of its domestic law. Regarding co-oper -
618 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook