Search News and Articles
Legal Developments Worldwide
- United Arab Emirates
- Austria
- Azerbaijan
- Belgium
- Bahrain
- Bosnia-Herzegovina
- Bulgaria
- Belarus
- China
- Croatia
- Cyprus
- Czech Republic
- Germany
- Denmark
- Egypt
- Spain
- Estonia
- Finland
- France
- Greece
- Guernsey
- Gibraltar
- Hong Kong
- Hungary
- Indonesia
- India
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Japan
- Jersey
- Cayman Islands
- Kazakhstan
- Lithuania
- Latvia
- Luxembourg
- Malta
- Moldova
- Mexico
- Malaysia
- Netherlands
- Norway
- Philippines
- Poland
- Portugal
- Qatar
- Romania
- Russia
- South Africa
- Sweden
- Singapore
- South Korea
- Slovakia
- Slovenia
- Saudi Arabia
- Switzerland
- Taiwan
- Thailand
- Turkey
- Ukraine
- Uzbekistan
- Vietnam
- British Virgin Islands
- Serbia
- Guernsey
- Jersey
- Mauritius
- Montenegro
- Senegal
- UK
Articles contributed by Cerrahoglu Law Firm
AS OF 1 OCTOBER 2011 TURKEY HAS A NEW CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE REGULATING DOMESTIC ARBITRATION
In Turkey, the Code of Civil Procedure and the International Arbitration Act (“IAA”) provide the statutory basis for the settlement of disputes by arbitration. Domestic arbitrations are subject to the Code of Civil Procedure and international arbitrations are governed by the IAA.
RESTRICTION ON PRIVILEGED SHARES IN JOINT STOCK COMPANIES
The Law No. 6215 Amending Several Laws (“Amending Law”), which includes provisions amending the current Turkish Commercial Code No. 6762 (“TCC”), has been published in the Official Gazette dated 12.04.2011. We would like to bring to your attention below, the significant amendment related to restriction of privileged shares in joint stock companies where Government, special provincial administrations, municipalities and other public legal entities, trade unions, associations, foundations, cooperatives and their parents (“Public Legal Entities”) hold shares.
MARKET SHARE THRESHOLD UNDER THE COMMUNIQUE ON BLOCK EXEMPTION REGARDING VERTICAL AGREEMENTS
A brand-new provision amended to the Communiqué on Block Exemption regarding Vertical Agreements No. 2002/2 (“Communiqué) has introduced a threshold for the market share, which shall be entitled to benefit from the block exemption under such Communiqué. Prior to the amendment all vertical agreements concluded between two or more undertakings operating at different levels of production or distribution chain with the purpose of purchase, sale or resale of particular goods or services were deemed to benefit from block exemption as per Article 2 of the Communiqué provided that provisions of such vertical agreements fulfill the conditions in the Communiqué. However, the new provision amended under the second paragraph of Article 2 provides that “The exemption provided under this Communiqué shall be applicable provided that the market share of the supplier in the relevant market where it provides goods or services, which are the subject of the vertical agreement, does not exceed 40 %.” This provision is meant to read that suppliers with a market share exceeding 40 % in the relevant market shall not benefit from block exemption even if they fulfill the criteria set forth under the Communiqué.
NON-COMPETITION CLAUSES UNDER TURKISH COMPETITION JURISPRUDENCE
Any concentration between the parties may also include certain restrictions. Especially, restrictions are imposed on the vendor if the vendor has substantial know-how, customer portfolio and distribution network in the market and the purchaser is new to the market in question. In such situations, non-compete and non-solicitation clauses, restrictions on intellectual property rights and supply and purchase agreements may be imposed on the vendor in order to protect the business and the goodwill of such business acquired by the purchaser. Such restrictions are generally defined as “ancillary restrictions” under competition legislation. Under normal circumstances they would be considered as restricting competition in the market; however, in case of implementation of a concentration, they are not considered as anti-competitive but necessary if the scope, duration and the geographical area of such restrictions do not exceed what the implementation of the concentration reasonably requires.
Settling Investment-Related Disputes: Implementation of the Washington Convention
The Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (the Washington Convention) provides for the settlement of disputes arising directly from an investment between a contracting state and a national of another contracting state.
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards
Two legislative sources apply to the enforcement and recognition of international arbitral awards in Turkey. They are Articles 60 to 63 of the Code of International Private and Procedural Law (1) (Law 5718) and the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.(2)
Statutory Mechanisms for Arbitration
In Turkey, the Civil Procedure Law and the International Arbitration Act (1) provide the statutory mechanisms for the settlement of disputes by arbitration. Domestic arbitrations are subject to the Civil Procedure Law, while international arbitrations are governed by the International Arbitration Act.
Institutional Arbitration in Turkey: the Istanbul Chamber of Commerce
The Istanbul Chamber of Commerce (ICOC) has been operating as an arbitration institute since 1979. With the purpose of making Istanbul an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction, the ICOC acts as the principal institute for providing services to parties to a commercial dispute seeking settlement through arbitration. Thus far, 270 disputes have been settled through ICOC arbitration. Such disputes have involved both Turkish parties and foreign entities
FOREIGNER’S ACQUISITION OF REAL ESTATE
LAW NUMBERED 5782 REGARDING THE AMENDMENT OF THE LAND REGISTRY LAW PASSED AS A RESULT OF THE ANNULMENT DECISION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AND THE LEGAL STATUS REGARDING FOREIGNER’S ACQUISITION OF REAL ESTATE UNDER THIS LAW
LAW NUMBERED 5782 REGARDING THE AMENDMENT OF THE LAND REGISTRY LAW
PASSED AS A RESULT OF THE ANNULMENT DECISION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AND THE LEGAL STATUS REGARDING FOREIGNER’S ACQUISITION OF REAL ESTATE UNDER THIS LAW