Proceedings subsequent to issuance of award
Interpretation and correction of awards
Does the arbitral tribunal have the power to correct or interpret an award on its own or at the parties’ initiative? What time limits apply?
Under Civil Procedure Law No. 6100 (CPL) and International Arbitration Law No. 4686 (IAL), the tribunal has the power to correct or interpret an award on its own or upon the request of a party. The applicable time limit is two weeks under the CPL and 30 days under the IAL if the correction will be made by the tribunal on its own. If a party requests a correction or interpretation, then the request must be filed within two weeks under the CPL and 30 days under the IAL, each following the date of notification of the award.
Challenge of awards
How and on what grounds can awards be challenged and set aside?
Under the IAL, an award will be set aside if a party proves that:
- a party lacked capacity or the arbitration agreement was invalid;
- the procedure or composition of the tribunal was irregular;
- the tribunal unduly assumed jurisdiction (or failed to assume jurisdiction);
- arbitrators have acted beyond their jurisdiction;
- the equality of parties’ principle was not observed; or
- the award was not made within the time limits.
An award may be set aside if the court finds ex officio that:
- the dispute is not arbitrable per Turkish law; or
- the award is contrary to public policy.
Grounds for setting aside under the CPL are similar to those for the IAL.
Levels of appeal
How many levels of appeal are there? How long does it generally take until a challenge is decided at each level? Approximately what costs are incurred at each level? How are costs apportioned among the parties?
If an award is challenged under the IAL, proceedings will be reviewed by the Regional Court of Appeals, and its decision may be appealed before the Supreme Court of Appeals. The length of challenge proceedings has considerably shortened recently. Finalisation of proceedings may take one to two years. Costs incurred at each level would be borne by the losing party. The procedure under the CPL is similar.
Recognition and enforcement
What requirements exist for recognition and enforcement of domestic and foreign awards, what grounds exist for refusing recognition and enforcement, and what is the procedure?
Awards falling within the sphere of application of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (NYC) will be enforced in accordance with the NYC, and the International Private and Civil Procedure Law No. 5718 (IPPL) will apply for enforcement of foreign awards falling outside the NYC’s sphere of application.
Grounds to refuse enforcement under the IPPL are substantially similar to those of the NYC, with the caveat that, unlike the NYC, the IPPL does not provide for a permissive language in terms of deciding to refuse enforcement and instead imposes an obligation on the courts to refuse enforcement if there are any grounds to refuse enforcement.
Under the IPPL, an award will be refused if a party proves that:
- there is no arbitration agreement or the arbitration agreement is invalid;
- due process is violated;
- arbitrators have acted beyond their jurisdiction;
- there is an irregularity in the procedure or composition of the tribunal; or
- the award is not final, binding or enforceable or was set aside in the place of arbitration.
Enforcement will also be refused if a party proves or the court determines ex officio that:
- the award is contrary to public morality or public policy; or
- the dispute is not arbitrable under Turkish law.
Time limits for enforcement of arbitral awards
Is there a limitation period for the enforcement of arbitral awards?
Under Turkish law, the time limit for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards is not specifically governed, so the law of the place of arbitration or the law applicable to proceedings may be taken into consideration in determining time limits.
In accordance with the Turkish Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004, the time limit for filing an execution proceeding based on an award that has been enforced is 10 years from the date of finalisation of the enforcement decision.
Enforcement of foreign awards
What is the attitude of domestic courts to the enforcement of foreign awards set aside by the courts at the place of arbitration?
If the enforcement proceedings in Türkiye are subject to the NYC, then the courts may enforce an award that has been set aside at the place of arbitration in theory – due to the permissive language used by the NYC (ie, ‘may refuse’). This is not the case under the IPPL, because setting aside an award is a ground to refuse enforcement, and a court applying the IPPL must refuse enforcement if any of the grounds exists.
Enforcement of orders by emergency arbitrators
Does your domestic arbitration legislation, case law or the rules of domestic arbitration institutions provide for the enforcement of orders by emergency arbitrators?
Enforcement of orders or awards rendered by emergency arbitrators is not specifically provided under the Turkish arbitration law. Whether these are enforceable is mainly related to the nature of the award (ie, interim or final) and is debated.
Cost of enforcement
What costs are incurred in enforcing awards?
In enforcement proceedings, a ‘judgment and writ fee’ incurs. Whether this fee is fixed or proportional is debated in practice. Other costs include costs for execution if the award is being executed in Türkiye, court fees and counsel fees.
Sourse: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=7d4a8aa2-f90d-4f99-8296-d4b3889263d8&utm_source=lexology+daily+newsfeed&utm_medium=html+email&utm_campaign=lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=lexology+daily+newsfeed+2024-04-23&utm_term=