Melis

Res. Assist.

The US company and the German company, both operating in the field of telecommunications, decided in their contract that any disputes arising from the contract would be heard exclusively in the Bonn courts. However, as a result of a contractual dispute, the US company filed a lawsuit against the German company in the District Court of Washington. In this case, the US court gave a decision of lack of jurisdiction and dismissed the case for this reason. Thereupon, in the lawsuit filed in the Bonn court, a compensation for the damages arising from the litigation costs (the American rule of cost) and attorney fees due to the lawsuit filed in the US was requested. In the 2019 German Federal Court (BGH) decision, the claim for compensation for the damages arising from the breach of the choice of the court agreement was accepted within the framework of the German Civil Code (BGB) § 280.&nbsp;The 2019 BGH decision is quite innovative in terms of accepting the breach of the choice of court agreement, and leads to compensation liability in the field of substantive law (obligations law). The decision has the impact of setting a precedent both in terms of the legal systems in Continental Europe and Turkey. In addition, a clear jurisprudence was presented in the decision in terms of the legal nature of the choice of court agreement, the law applicable to the choice of court agreement and the interpretation of the choice of court agreement. The legal nature of the choice of court agreement was accepted as a substantive law contract in terms of the obligation not to file a lawsuit in the non-chosen court. Furthermore, regardless of the legal nature of the choice of court agreement, if the interpretation of the party wills indicates that the parties enter into an obligation of not to file a lawsuit against each other in a nonchosen court, the liability must arise.The court accepted that the liability for compensation would be subject to the BGB § 280, that regulates liability for compensation in the case of the breach of contract. In Turkish law, this issue is regulated in article 112 of the Turkish Code of Obligation (TCO). Therefore, the examination of the applicability of the legal grounds in the 2019 BGH decision in terms of Turkish law should be examined within the framework of this article. According to the conditions provided in article 112 of the TCO, the act of filing a lawsuit in the non-chosen court will constitute a breach of contract.&nbsp;The second condition provided by this article is the occurrence of damage. If the non-chosen court where the lawsuit was filed gives a decision of lack of jurisdiction, the litigation costs and attorney fees incurred must be calculated. However, if the non-chosen court, where the lawsuit was filed, found itself having jurisdiction and making decisions on the merits, revealing the occurrence of damage would be quite difficult. In accordance with the international comity, in this case, finding that damage has occurred and may constitute an interference with the sovereignty of the states. The third condition sought in article 112 of the TCO is the existence of a fault. The plaintiff will be liable for the damage incurred unless he can prove that he was not at fault in filing a lawsuit in the non-chosen court. The plaintiff cannot prove that he is not at fault by claiming that his lawyer recommended filing a lawsuit in the nonchosen court. The last condition sought in TCO article 112 is that there should be a causal link between the damage and the act of the breach of the contract.The compensation claim arising from the breach of the choice of court agreement is subject to a ten-year limitation period stipulated in article 146 of the TCO. This period will begin to run from the date of filing a lawsuit in the non-chosen court.&nbsp;&nbsp;

An Examination of the Liability for Compensation for the Breach  of Choice of Court Agreements: In the Light of the German Federal  Court Decision of 17.10.2019

Gaye

Assoc. Prof.

Erdem

In 2017, the Turkish Constitutional Court settled a decision involving collective labor agreement autonomy. Due to the splintered nature of the state personnel regime, many different rules apply to some that do not apply to others. According to the law ruling on the rights of the personnel of the Mesleki Yeterlilik Kurumu [Professional Competency Board], increasing these personnel’s wages beyond that of personnel in the Ministry of Labor and Social Security is forbidden. However, due to autonomy of collective labor agreement being prescribed in Article 53 of the Turkish Constitution, social parties are entitled to conclude the improvement of wages on their own. The problem of nuisance value was brought to Court of Accounts due to the wages being paid as concluded in the Collective Labor Agreement,. The authorities from the Professional Competency Board upheld the principle and constitutional right of autonomy of collective labor agreement and brought the problem before the Constitutional Court to determine if social parties have the right to breach a provision in a code under the pretext of the autonomy of collective labor agreement. The Supreme Court decided with a majority vote to limit this autonomy! The Court implemented the same principles, but concluded with a distractive solution in which social parties may not increase wages that are limited by a code and found this not to go against either Article 53 or 51 in the Constitution.The current article examines and critiques each principle of constitutionality, because limiting the autonomy of collective labor agreement is not permitted, even by codes. The Supreme Court appears to be trying to preserve public income, while stretching its own audit principles. This article first explains the right to collective labor agreement and autonomy of collective labor bargaining, because while the Constitution does not prescribe autonomy of collective labor agreement, Article 53 accepted its doctrine by giving social parties the right to conclude collective labor agreement and according them the right to autonomy of collective labor agreement. The decision this article has made its subject concerns when the Supreme Court first broadened the limitations on the right to collective labor agreement as prescribed in Article 53. Article 51 entitles citizens to establish and join a union, albeit with some limitations such as maintaining public order. Article 53, however, has no limitations.The Court stated in its decision that the limitations prescribed in Article 51 may be accepted as limitations on the right to conclude collective labor agreement and therefore on the right to autonomy itself. The current article must first criticize this broadened commentary due to the comment regarding the ruling on limiting fundamental rights. In addition, the Court also lowered the requirements for limiting fundamental rights in a democratic society. The Court stated that protecting public income and sources is important, that lawmakers as a result have the right to limit the autonomy of collective labor agreement in order to protect public resources, and that this is an acceptable requirement in a democratic society. Protecting public resources by only limiting the wages of one group of state personnel must be stated as being unnecessary in a democratic society while so many other more effective ways exist to protect it. Therefore, this limitation in code is not proportional to the aim because lawmakers have no right to limit the autonomy of collective labor agreement as prescribed in the Constitution in order to preserve public resources while so many more effective and legal ways can be found to do this than limiting the wages of a single group. This is why this article decided to examine this issue in order to criticize and analyze the Constitutional Court’s audit principles as well as the constitutionality of the right of voluntary collective bargaining and, as a result. autonomy. However, the problem is not caused by the Constitutional Court but the state personnel regime that rules over personnel in various groups. Therefore, changing the entire state personnel regime would be really extreme in order to prevent unconstitutionality and inequality and to provide labor, peace and public order.&nbsp;

May The Constitutional Court Limit Collective Labor Agreement Autonomy

Abdurrahman

Protection of minority shareholders is one of the fundamental issues in corporate law. In this regard, three questions are of critical significance. First, whom exactly does corporate law protect as “minority shareholders?” Second, why does corporate law protect minority shareholders? Third, how does corporate law protect minority shareholders? This paper seeks to answer these questions by analyzing the protection afforded to minority shareholders under the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC).Part I of the paper explains the scope of this analysis and lays out the assumptions that the analysis will be based on. Corporate law protects minority shareholders vis-àvis two agency problems. The first agency problem is the managerial agency problem and the second one is the controlling shareholder agency problem, which arises in corporations with a controlling shareholder (CSH). Since most Turkish corporations are private corporations shares of which are not listed on a stock exchange, the latter of the two is the more important one when it comes to minority protection in Turkish corporate law. Therefore, this paper analyzes minority protection in corporations: (i) which are close and non-listed; (ii) which have a CSH; (iii) in which there is a personal relationship between the CSH and minority shareholders; (iv) in which minority shareholders are not protected by non-TCC means (i.e., the charter or a shareholders’ agreement); and (v) in which it is difficult for the minority shareholder to sell their shares for fair value.&nbsp;Part II focuses on the concept of “minority.” The TCC refers to shareholders representing 10% (5% for public corporations) of the share capital as minority shareholders in several provisions. These shareholders are considered as minority shareholders in provisions where a right is bestowed upon the shareholders meeting that threshold. However, a thorough analysis shows that this use of the word minority is not consistent within the TCC, as there are instances where the term is used without there being a threshold or where the term is not mentioned despite there being a threshold of 10% of the share capital. Nevertheless, most scholars define minority shareholders as shareholders who satisfy the aforementioned threshold(s). Notably, defining minority shareholders as such excludes shareholders with a stake less than 10%. Therefore, this definition fails to accurately reflect the type of shareholders protected by the TCC protects as the minority. This paper argues for a more functional definition and offers a definition based on the minority’s positions vis-à-vis the CSH.&nbsp;Part III seeks to answer these two questions: Why do minority shareholders need protection and why does this protection need to be in the form of mandatory norms? The first question is answered through examples that demonstrate how minority shareholders are vulnerable to several legal and financial risks. The paper then explains why minority protection should mostly be afforded through mandatory norms instead of default ones. It answers the second question in two parts. First, during the stage of investment in a minority stake, informational deficiencies as well as the fact that there is, as assumed by this paper, a personal relationship between the CSH and minority shareholders can result in investors waiving their statutory rights. Second, the majority principle, which allows the CSH to amend the charter in the general assembly, implies that any protective mechanism that is not mandatory can be wiped out by the CSH at the post-investment stage. This explains why norms that aim at protecting investors should, in principle, be mandatory.In the final part, this paper offers a new taxonomy of the TCC’s minority protection mechanisms. It classifies the mechanisms into five categories, building upon the voice and exit taxonomies already prevailing in the US literature. The first category is voice, which refers to mechanisms that allow minority shareholders to influence corporate decisions and transactions. The second category, exit rights, enables minority shareholders to exit the corporation through a free or safe exit. The right to a free exit means that shares are freely transferable without any restrictions. Since a free exit is unlikely due to legal and financial restrictions, a safe exit allows minority shareholders to sell their shares to the corporation or CSH at fair value. The other three categories, which are concepts first developed in this paper, supplement the first two. Foundational rights are mechanisms such as informational rights and antidilution norms that ensure proper exercise of voice and exit rights, while gap-filling principles are abstract norms that supplement the more concrete rules in previous categories. Finally, protective walls are legal mechanisms that aim at protecting the very system that protects minority shareholders, such as the doctrines of nonwaivable and acquired rights as well as the principle of mandatory norms regarding charter provisions.&nbsp;

Minority Shareholder Protection in Corporations: Protection for Whom, Why, and How?

Şirin

Assist. Prof.

The relationship between genetic, social and legal paternity in family law is worth examining. As surrogacy and egg donation are not accepted in our law the distinction between genetic and legal maternity is not a feature in the establishment of parentage between mother and child. However, for historical reasons, the relationship between father and child, has always been controversial. As in many jurisdictions, the establishment of legal paternity between father and child under Turkish-Swiss law is not directly based on genetic ancestry.&nbsp;As the determination of genetic paternity was not possible when the Civil Code was initially adopted in Turkey, it was necessary to distinguish between genetic ancestry and legal paternity based on external factors. Although with today’s scientific advances, especially developments in DNA analysis techniques, the determination of genetic paternity has become very easy. Nevertheless, under Turkish law, as in many countries, genetic paternity alone is not enough to establish legal parentage, since presumptions accepted in law, for a number of reasons, are preserved. In particular the presumption of a husband’s paternity.As a result, within the framework of legal regulations, there are many situations where legal paternity is separated from genetic ancestry in the establishment of the paternal relationship between father and child. This separation is primarily due to the presumption that the husband to whom the mother was married at the time of birth is legally regarded as the father of a child, even if there is no genetic ancestry (TCC art. 285). As long as paternity, based on this legal presumption is not annulled the husband in the marriage remains the legal father, although he may not be the genetic father. It is accepted that in order to protect family unity the legislator has given priority to the moral/social paternal relationship over genetic ancestry.Legal paternity and genetic ancestry are also separated when establishing legal paternity through recognition. Therefore, it is possible to establish legal paternity between a child and a father through recognition without a genetic relationship to the child. However, if the recognition is challenged before the courts and it is proven&nbsp;that the recognizing person is not the genetic father, the legally established paternity can be annulled. Unless such recognition is annulled, the recognizing person is legally registered as the father even if he may not be the genetic father. In addition, in establishing a legal paternal relationship through court decision, the lawmaker has deemed it sufficient that the probability of the defendant being a genetic father is equal to another man (TCC art. 302/III)1 . In all these cases, there may be differences between genetic ancestry and legal paternity.Generally Turkish law allows a legal paternal relationship between the child and the genetic father to be established by marrying the mother, recognizing the child and/or by a court declaration. However, in cases where the establishment of such a legal paternal relationship is prevented despite the request of the genetic father, for example due to the fact that the child has a legal paternity with another male, the issue of establishing the legal paternity of the genetic father with the child is problematic under our law, as it is in many legal systems. In such cases, since the child can only establish a legal paternity with one single male, the existing legal paternal relationship must be annulled first in order to establish a legal paternity between the child and his genetic father.In this respect, the role of the genetic father should also be examined. Under Turkish law, it is generally accepted that the genetic father has the right to file a challenge of recognition (TCC art. 298). In addition to this, the genetic father is also granted the right to challenge the presumption of husband’s paternity. The Turkish legislator, following the modern trend, has given the genetic father the right to file a lawsuit for annulment of the paternity of the husband under certain conditions (TCC art. 291/I). There is no such regulation in Switzerland and thus, the Turkish legislator’s granting of such a right has been extremely innovative in terms of Turkish-Swiss law. Innovative because under Turkish-Swiss law, a third party’s claim that he is the father of a child born in wedlock was considered a violation of the personal rights of the mother and husband. However, it has been concluded that this newly introduced provision does not adequately protect the genetic father’s right to challenge legal paternity and also does not take into account the interests of the child and the family. For this reason, it needs to be revised.

The Position of Genetic Father under Turkish Paternity Law

Zeynep

Article 305/A of the Code of Civil Procedure (Law No. 6100) was enacted pursuant to the Law on Amending the Code of Civil Procedure and Other Laws (Law No. 7251). According to the article, “within one month from the notification of the judgment, each party may request a supplementary ruling from the court for matters left undecided partly or as a whole, even though they were asserted or ought to be resolved ex officio. Appellate remedies are available against these rulings.” This is, in fact, an adaptation of article 437/4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows this procedure in arbitration.If a deficiency is found in the judgment, it can be eliminated through the completion of judgment. In other words, a supplementary ruling may be requested from the court to avert any omission in the judgment if a claim in accumulation was left unresolved or if such judicial costs as the attorney’s fee were not decided upon.This legislation serves the principle of procedural economy and the realization of more effective legal protection. However, because completion of judgments is a new institution in the civil judiciary with an ambiguous nature, several problems that arise in the finalization and enforcement of judgments must be addressed. They can be classified into two categories: the possibility of contradictory judgments due to separate appellate remedies for both rulings, and the question of whether these judgments may be executed separately and, if so, whether they may be joined in the enforcement procedure.Considering the identified problems, this study reaches the following conclusions:Because of the separate appellate remedies for both rulings, the first and the supplementary rulings are also finalized independent of each other. In this context, if separate appellate remedies are applied against both rulings, it would be appropriate to join them in the remedies procedure. If appellate remedies are not applied against the first ruling but they are applied against the supplementary ruling, the first ruling constitutes the final judgment for the supplementary ruling. In the opposite case, if appellate remedies are not applied against the supplementary ruling but the first ruling is reversed as a result of the appellate remedy review, the conclusion must be reached by making a binary distinction:On the one hand, if the supplementary ruling is independent of the first ruling, it is not possible for the judgments to affect each other, and there is no problem with the finalization of the judgment.On the other hand, if the first and the supplementary rulings affect each other, with the finalization of the supplementary ruling, a final judgment occurs in terms of the merits of the legal relationship. Therefore, in the appellate remedies against the first ruling, the first ruling cannot be reversed. However, if the first ruling is reversed by disregarding the final decision, and this ruling becomes final, there are two final judgments that contradict each other in terms of the merits of the legal relationship, and a retrial of the second final judgment should be resorted to. However, if the supplementary ruling is only about judicial costs or attorney’s fees, the appellate remedies against the first ruling also affect the supplementary ruling.In our opinion, it is possible for the first and the supplementary rulings to be executed separately. These judgments are separate final decisions, which are finalized separately and have separate appellate remedies. However, if the supplementary ruling is related to judicial costs or an accessory of the subject of the case that cannot be executed before it becomes final, enforcement is not possible before the first ruling is finalized.If both rulings are executed separately, the joinder of enforcement procedures might be requested. However, even if these enforcement procedures are joined, they are independent enforcements.The issues explained above must be clarified in the Turkish legislation.&nbsp;

Effect of Completion of Judgments on Finalization and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil Procedure Law

Liability expresses the responsibility individuals have to fix the damage they have caused to others. This responsibility may arise from a contract or tort, as well as from the law. One of the crucial problems of determining a debtor’s liability is whether it should be assessed by evaluating only external factors or by also evaluating internal factors. When taking objective factors into account, the liability of the debtor is a strict liability. However, to consider subjective factors means that liability is based on fault.Different types of liability were practiced in Roman law, which lasted almost 1,300 years. Initially, the rule generally was strict liability. Afterwards, first in tort law and then in contractual law, fault liability occurred. In the period of Justinian I, however, fault liability became the rule.Beginning in the middle of the Regnum period, the evolution toward fault liability commenced by means of intent, as sought for in tort law. In the Laws of the Twelve Tables, only intent was sought for liability in murder. With the Lex Aquilia adopted toward the end of the 3rd century BC, negligence was also considered sufficient for the existence of liability in the field of wrongful acts resulting in damage to property.The idea of being careful and not harming others originated in Greek philosophy and was seen to be effective in the transition from strict liability to fault liability, which developed as a measure of responsibility. The owner and father of the family (pater familias) was considered responsible for the wrongful acts and damages caused by the slaves and members of the family (filius familia) as well as the pets owned.With Lex Aquilia, negligence being accepted as adequate for the existence of liability resulting in damage to property also affected liability as understood in contract law, and the transition to fault liability began.The rule of “Uti lingua nuncupassit ita ius esto (as he declares orally, be that law)” which emerged in the old legal period regarding giving loans and was present in the Laws of the Twelve Tables, states that strict liability also applies to contracts. With the pre-classical legal period, the concepts of dolus and culpa began to find places for themselves. However, the concept of strict liability did not come to an end and continued to be in practice. With regards to debts imposed upon parties,&nbsp;the differences contracts had in their structure prevented the application of a single liability criterion for all contract types. For this reason, different liability criteria were in put into practice together, as had been the case in the pre-classical legal period when the transition first commenced. One criterion of liability current in that period was custodia (supervisory) liability. After this, diligentia can be mentioned as the first milestone of fault liability and utilitas as a special application of diligentia. In the era of Justinian I, the prevailing principle was omnis culpa liability, which expresses responsibility for all faults.Custodia liability was usually practiced in contracts when the debtor held property belonging to the creditor for his own benefit. As the prevailing principle throughout the classical period, custodia liability included unexpected situations (casus fortuitus), and thus also calls to mind guarantee liability. As a rule, a debtor was not liable for force majeure (vis maior) except in cases of default where the debtor’s liability expanded to include vis maior.Starting in the post-classical period and based on slight negligence, diligentia liability was accepted by taking into consideration the care that a good head of household (pater familias) should show. Diligentia liability is the subjectivation of custodia, which expresses objective liability. Later in the post-classical period, the importance Christianity attached to will greatly impacted the acceptance of fault lability. Being based on culpa (negligence), diligentia liability was objectified by seeking out the attention and care (culpa in abstracto) that a good pater familias should show. This objective liability, in terms of some obligatio, could also be combined with subjective elements by seeking the attention and care that the debtor should show in his own affairs. This criterion was expressed as culpa in concreto and constituted the lightened version of diligentia. During the reign of Justinian I, culpa liability became properly clear. Failing to show the attention and care that anyone is able to show was expressed as culpa lata (gross negligence) and considered equal to intent. In this period, the benefit obtained from the contract was taken into account in order to determine the degree of liability of the debtor, and the attention and care a debtor should show increased if the debtor had more benefits. However, some relationships such as mandatum (mandate) and negotiorum gestio (acting without authority) placed the care and attention required by the debtor who had no interest at the highest level.Due to the changes that took place in technology and social life with the Industrial Revolution, fault liability has become insufficient for eliminating the damages individuals suffered. Increased employment rates and expansion of activities and businesses that pose grave dangers to the people and environment have led to a return to strict liability. In this context, certain persons such as those who employ others,&nbsp;who have animals and are the heads of households, or who are owners of building facilities are held responsible for the damages suffered by others under certain conditions, even if they are not at fault. To accept all these responsibilities, rules similar to those in Roman law have been accepted, and the principle of strict liability was put into practice once again as it had in the past.Some of these liabilities appear to be based on aggravated versions of diligentia liability, while others are based on hazard, and others still are just simply based on the causation principle.Fault liability also means responsibility arising from all kinds of fault, especially intent, just as it had been in late Roman law. Utilitas is also a principle of Roman law that is currently used to determine liability in today’s modern law. Modern law has deemed vis maior to be a reason that interrupts the causal link and accepts it as a case that prevents the emergence of liability. Concordantly, the debtor who is under the fault liability will also be accepted as liable for unexpected situations in case of default.&nbsp;

The Process of Transforming Strict Liability into Liability for Fault in Roman Law, and the Effect This  Transformation Has Had on Modern Law

Barış

This study describes the fiscal law order in Turkey during the period of the 1921 Constitution and analyzes the effects of the change in the constitutional order on the fiscal law rules. The main source for the study is the official minutes of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TGNA), which is responsible for discussing fiscal law issues and creating rules. The data obtained from this source were generalized by induction, and the observed change was analyzed in comparison with the data in the previous and subsequent periods.The 1921 Constitution resulted from a republican political program against the Ottoman monarchy and the Istanbul government and from a nationalist political movement against both the Allied Powers and some ethnic groups in Turkey that supported their occupation. This program ultimately prevailed and manifested itself in the two constitutional concepts—national sovereignty and unity of forces (the supremacy of the assembly)—distilled in the text of the 1921 Constitution. Therefore, in the first part of this study, an answer is sought to the question of how the concept of national sovereignty was created with fiscal legislations in this period. The second part, however, focuses on the various effects and consequences of the change in the use of the budgetary authority, which embodies the concept of parliamentary supremacy.With respect to the first issue, the authority to impose fiscal burdens, given to the legislature under the 1876 Constitution, but not generally implemented at this time, was radically embraced by the TGNA during this period. The sharpest reaction here was directed at fiscal transactions in the form of decrees that were followed by the Ottoman government. Under the influence of the policy of national sovereignty, financial regulation was left solely to the law. Undoubtedly, legality is not just such a formal choice. It also functioned to replace Ottoman domination with the sovereignty of the TGNA and to provide a legal basis for de facto actions. Second, it became the basis for both the control of the executive and for the executive’s rejection of demands made against it. Thus, legality constitutes the basis of legal boundaries and the new regime for all power centers.Regarding the second issue, the effect of the period on the use of budgetary power reveals a more unusual picture. Despite the ongoing inability to make a regular budget that it inherited from the Ottoman legal order, the TGNA used its budget-making power through the Budget Commission that directed the ministries. Nevertheless, to judge by the performance of the budget and final account laws, the TGNA seems to have been relatively unsuccessful as a legislative body. One of the main reasons for this is the absence of a disciplined party structure. However, for the first time, the parliament decided that the ministers should pay compensation to the treasury on the grounds that they harmed the state, based on the legal responsibility of the ministers. At the same time, as an example of political accountability, ministers held responsible for acting arbitrarily or ignoring the will of the Assembly were dismissed through a vote of no confidence. Likewise, the 1921 budget was the first to be rejected by the TGNA.In sum, the period of the 1921 Constitution shows an extraordinary interim character in which the political structure, being incompatible with national sovereignty, was partially liquidated through the implementation of the constitutional fiscal rules. Fiscal conflicts played a role in shaping the government system, and some of those that were inherited from the previous period remained to be resolved in the next (1924) constitutional period. The 1921 Constitution, however, provides no automatic and instant formulas in this fiscal regime change. In fact, the Assembly’s ability to use its fiscal powers is a product of a political change, rather than legal change. In other words, the legal adoption of financial issues in this period resulted from the national sovereignty policy rather than from the adoption of the 1921 Constitution.&nbsp;

The Reflections of the 1921 Constitution on Turkey’s Fiscal Law Order

Erkan

As a rule in criminal law, each act that constitutes a crime is punished independently. In this context, the punishment of an act as a rule does not affect the criminal liability arising from another action the same offender performed prior to or after that act. In some cases, however, a very close relationship exists between more than one action committed consecutively by the same offender. This relationship becomes more visible when the offender in particular violates the same or similar legal values with acts that are committed in the same context and that become more and more serious. In such cases, legal doctrine states that the offender should be punished only for their posterior act, and this has given rise to the concept of unpunishable prior acts. Which legal basis this concept is based on is a highly controversial issue. The conclusions from this discussion aim to determine the conditions and scope of this concept.This study will approach the concept of unpunishable prior acts as well as its legal foundations, conditions, and consequences. In this context, the doctrine must first be said to consider this concept mostly within the scope of the principles of ideal concurrence of offenses (or improper joinder of offenses). However, under which principle of the ideal concurrence of offenses this concept should be addressed is controversial. While some authors have tried to explain the concept according to the principle of subsidiarity, others have attempted to explain it according to the principle of consumption. Some authors have also made a distinction and referred to both principles in terms of acceptable categories.Despite multiple acts being found under the concept of unpunishable previous acts, each of which gives rise to a different crime, close links exist among them. This is because these acts are committed under the same context, against the same victim, and on the same subject while violating the same (or another closely related) legal value. Thus, although multiple acts are found, each of which constitutes a crime, these acts are the subject of a single normative-social valuelessness judgment due to the connections among them. Within the framework of this valuelessness judgment, the offender is punished only for the more severe posterior act, and as such, punishment for prior acts becomes unnecessary. For this reason, the norm violated by the posterior offense exhausts the previous one. In this respect and according to this study’s opinion, unpunishable previous acts are based on the principle of consumption.This legal basis also establishes the circumstances under which previous actions cannot be punished: First, more than one crime must have occurred. The concept of impunity for previous acts will not need to be applied for the occurrence of a single act or crime. In addition, previous and posterior actions must be against the same victim, committed on the same subject, and violate the same (or another closely related) legal value. In addition, the previous and subsequent actions must be processed in the same context, and the posterior action must cause greater unjustness. Lastly, the posterior act must be punishable.Crimes that meet these conditions can be classified under various categories. The first category involves the offender committing another crime in preparation for or as a precursor to the posterior crime before it is committed. The production or purchase of instruments to be used in the crime of counterfeiting money prior to the act of counterfeiting money can be given as an example of this (Turkish Penal Code [TPC] Arts. 197 &amp; 200). The second category involves the offender first starting to commit a crime, whether intentionally or negligently, and then stopping it. However, within the framework of the offender’s new purpose that emerges immediately afterward, this time they commit a more severe crime. The case where the offender first injures a victim, whether intentionally (TPC Art. 86) or negligently (TPC Art. 89), and then intentionally kills the victim (TPC Art. 81) can be given as an example of this. In the third and last category, the offender commits a negligent crime. However, immediately afterwards, the offender commits a more severe negligent crime against the same victim. The case where the offender first injures the victim negligently (TPC Art. 89) and then kills the victim negligently (TPC Art. 85) is an example of this.In all these cases, the offender is punished only for their posterior act. The offender is not punished separately for their prior actions, and these prior actions are not taken into account while determining the penalty.&nbsp;

Unpunishable Prior Acts

Ümmühan Elçin

This paper proposes a paradigm shift in the international refugee regime. It defends that burden sharing must shift from state-centrism and security concerns to the human rights and international community perspective. Furthermore, it makes proposals to fill normative gaps regarding temporary protection and refugee burden-sharing.The right to seek and enjoy asylum in other countries for a person who is faced with persecution is a human right. However, it does not constitute an international obligation for states. According to the present refugee regime, refugee admission is within the exclusive sovereignty and entirely at the discretion of the host states. States usually avoid admitting refugees due to various concerns regarding security, their social and economic situation, and the like. As a result, the refugee burden is placed on the shoulders of just a few states. In fact, it should be shared by all.We see some burden-sharing mechanisms proposed in theory or arising in practice. Offering compensation to the host state, providing safe havens for refugees, applying quotas, exercising the state of origin liability, and sharing responsibility among a certain region or group are possible examples. These solutions, however, clearly do not work in real life.The study is based on Friedmann’s thesis on the everchanging international community and, thus, on an understanding of international law.The paper advocates placing the burden of refugees, including the burden of temporary protection, on the international community as a whole. This argument concerns which refugee burden-sharing is a jus cogens from which the international community as a whole benefits. It argues that jus cogens entails erga omnes obligation for the entire international community. In fact, erga omnes obligations may arise even if refugee burden-sharing is not accepted as jus cogens under international law.While discussing refugee burden-sharing, the study uses the logic of collective action and prisoner’s dilemma. Olson’s theory of the logic of collective action can be&nbsp;summarized as follows: Groups of individuals with common interests are expected to act in their common interests; however, single individuals often act in their own interests. Although the international community as a whole will benefit from refugee burden-sharing, states prioritize their national interests and refrain from admitting refugees.Tucker’s prisoner dilemma theory is a zero-sum game theory based on cooperative behaviour. It concerns two persons, jointly charged with violating the law, who are held separately by the police. These persons fail to cooperate, which leads to the worst result for both of them. Failure to cooperate in sharing the burden of refugees leads the international community to the worst outcome for both refugees and states.This paper also contends that states that participate in refugee burden-sharing have special rights to claim from other states. This argument is inspired by Hart’s theory of “mutuality of restriction.” Hart expresses his theory as follows: “when a number of persons conduct any joint enterprise according to rules and thus restrict their liberty, those who have submitted to these restrictions when required have a right to a similar submission from those who have benefited by their submission.” Accordingly, the refugee burden-sharing obligation for all states has its roots in international cooperation.Furthermore, this study notes the normative gaps in the international law on temporary protection and refugee burden-sharing from a human rights perspective and the insufficiency of institutions related to the subject matter such as the UNHCR. It focuses on normative gaps to start a discussion on the legal obligations of states. The article suggests the following: to make universal legal arrangements, which overlap with obligatory characteristics of the jus cogens norm and erga omnes obligation, increasing the effectiveness of international institutions, interstate cooperation, and spreading the responsibility to the international community as a whole.&nbsp;

Propositions to Fill for Normative Gaps on Temporary Protection and Refugee Burden Sharing

The SARS-CoV-2 virus has caused a pandemic and is a zoonotic virus that has spread from animals to humans. Studies show that the virus most likely emerged from a wet market in China where wild animals are kept and traded under poor conditions. SARS-CoV-2 has been categorized as a bat-derived virus in the coronavirus family. Scientific research has indicated that an intermediate host should have occurred for the virus to have transferred from bats to humans. Pangolin is a species unique to Asia and has been identified as the probable link in this process. The species is highly demanded and illegally traded at a large scale. The pangolin species has been listed as a species of concern by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and its international trade is subject to strict rules.CITES is a comprehensive global convention regulating wildlife trade regarding endangered species. The convention was first enacted in 1975 and now has 182 parties. The convention’s aim is to regulate the trade of endangered species in order to limit their exploitation. In this process three appendices have been established. Appendix I specifically restricts the trade of endangered species. Appendix II protects species that may be threatened with extinction by requiring their trade to be controlled. Appendix III prevents species that may be facing excessive consumption at the request of a party already involved in the trade of said species that need assistance in preventing other countries from exploiting them. The implementation of the convention depends on the cooperation of the Convention Secretariat, the parties, and international organizations such as INTERPOL and the World Customs Organization. The convention works through a licensing system across borders to identify illegal trade. The exporting and importing states parties in this structure have different obligations regarding the monitoring of trade.The possible link between SARS-CoV-2 and endangered species (i.e., the pangolin) has raised several questions regarding CITES. If the illegal trade of endangered species plays a role in a zoonotic disease, is this because of CITES being insufficiently implemented? If so, can CITES or its mechanisms be strengthened to tackle this problem? Lastly, can CITES help prevent future global zoonotic diseases such as SARS-CoV-2? This article aims to answer these questions.Since the establishment of CITES, various reforms and proposals for amendments to it have been suggested by NGOs and scholars. The most assertive approaches involve banning wildlife trade altogether and developing CITES to intervene in domestic trade. However, these approaches might actually harm CITES. Keeping in mind developing countries’ inability regarding controlling and monitoring wildlife trade, any strict regulations or prohibitions may move the trade to the black market.A recent proposal from Global Initiative to End Wildlife Crime is an amendment to CITES that will establish a new list (Appendix IV) containing the species that pose a threat to public and/or animal health. However, creating a new list may take years and might not provide the intended results, because CITES lacks the funding mechanism to implement new regulations like these.Another issue of debate involves considering illegal wildlife trade as a serious international crime. The Global Initiative to End Wildlife Crime suggests regulating illegal wildlife trade under organized crime through new protocol within the framework of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC). However, this would leave personal offenses out of the structure. States’ willingness to add a new binding protocol may additionally be another challenge.Illegal wildlife trade is a threat to both public and animal health. To tackle this problem, scholars propose regulations for protecting species that are transported and providing standard care for captured species and rules for breeding. These suggestions may help deal with zoonotic diseases. Having the CITES system adopt standards would be easier and is achievable through decisions made at a Conference of the Parties.The overall main purpose of CITES is to regulate and protect endangered wild species. Statistics show that CITES as one of the oldest environmental protection conventions has actually been successful in combating illegal trade. The long-term observations of wildlife show that, once a species is listed in CITES, their population tends to increase in numbers. For this reason, all suggestions for amendments and revisions should be made by taking into account the achievements of the Convention.&nbsp;

CITES as an International Instrument Against Pandemics that Threaten Human Life

Ömer

Prof. Dr.

Veliye

Assist. Prof. Dr.

Restricting the general assembly’s power to dismiss members from the board of directors may have considerable functions, especially for the company itself. However, these regulations also have effects that may damage the absolute and inalienable nature of such power, block the decision-making process in a company, and limit the ability to terminate the trust-based legal relationship between the company and a board member, thus resulting in negative consequences. Under Turkish Law, the validity of provisions in the articles of association limiting the dismissal of board members is unclear. This paper seeks to answer to the questions of (i) whether the removal of board members can be tied to a certain period or the presence of justified reasons or certain conditions, and (ii) whether special quorums can be sought regarding a general assembly meeting and this type of decision. While the answer to the first question is generally negative in existing doctrine, the answer to the second question is positive.The paper first conducts a comparative study using a functional perspective. Hence, the research provides the responses and alternative solutions found in various legal systems to the questions at hand. In comparative law, the authority of the general assembly to dismiss members from the board of directors directly or indirectly (e.g., through a supervisory board as in German law) is understood to not be able to be limited as a rule. In this context, the authority of the general assembly to dismiss members from the supervisory board cannot be limited in German Law. However, the ability to aggravate quorums or to anticipate certain conditions regarding the decision-making procedure is accepted. In US law, the State of Delaware has the mandatory rule that, with two exceptions, board members can be removed from office without cause. In French law, the general assembly’s power to dismiss members from the board of directors is absolute: the use of this authority cannot be conditional, and the existence of any reason cannot be sought. Even though not as strict as French law, the United Kingdom regulates shareholders’ authority to dismiss members from a board of directors as a mandate. However, the procedural rules that are to be followed in terms of the general assembly’s decision to dismiss board members and the contractual rights granted to the members constitute the limits of their freedom in this matter.The purpose as well as the wording of Article 408/2(b) of the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC) No. 6102) and TCC 364 do not allow provisions to articles of association that limit the general assembly’s authority to dismiss members from a board of directors. Therefore, such regulations are concluded to constitute a legal deviation and are not explicitly allowed within the meaning of TCC 340. Provisions to the articles of association that limit the general assembly’s authority to dismiss board members, such as for just cause, additional conditions, time, or sanctions, would&nbsp;infringe upon shareholders’ right to supervise [TCC 447/1(b)], deter the basic structure of the company [TCC 447/1(c)], and violate TCC 364. Thus, these types of provisions should be accepted as null and void. A heavier quorum should not be included in the articles of association with regard to dismissing members from the board of directors. The articles of association that require a quorum higher than what is legally stipulated for dismissing board members should be deemed invalid. This conclusion is not generally applicable to all general assembly resolutions; due to its importance, however, it does apply to decisions about dismissing members from the board of directors.&nbsp;

Limitation of the General Assembly’s Authority to Dismiss the Members of the Board of Directors

Sevda

Behind every injustice and malpractice reflected in language and actions, there is an erroneous prejudice and a traditionalized cultural structure that make them sustainable. Likewise, egalitarian and fair practices. Discrimination starts with language, and the culture and social network shaped by language permeate the attitudes and behaviors of society. Unquestionably, legal texts are the most important texts that must be purified from sexist and discriminatory language. Art. 2/f of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) requires States Parties to the Convention to eliminate all words, concepts, expressions, and forms of expression that constitute discrimination against women in all types of legal regulations and legal practices, to replace them with concepts formulated in a more egalitarian and inclusive legal language, or to abolish such regulations altogether.When the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC) is analyzed in terms of sexist expressions that foster discrimination against women and cause inequality of opportunity, a sexist conceptual preference that implicitly refers to human beings but explicitly emphasizes being a man, such as businessmen, seamen, and men employed, stands out. The emphasis on being a “man” as opposed to a human being or a person renders the language of the law, and thus the practice of law, sexist because it focuses on men and marginalizes women. However, in Turkish commercial practice,&nbsp;women also manage companies, become merchants, work on ships, and engage in transportation. In lieu of masculine expressions such as businessman and seaman, expressions that are more egalitarian, inclusive, and inclusive should be preferred. In fact, considering the technological transformation and the development of trade, it may be prudent to consider that the framework concepts should not even refer to being human.The language must observe equality; however, it is a grave error to think that a perfect legal language will immediately eliminate inequalities in practice. In addition to recognizing and protecting rights in an egalitarian language, equal opportunities for the exercise and functioning of these rights must be secured. In order for this to occur, a social transformation and a mentality shift must be fostered. The implementation of egalitarian language is a necessary and prioritized step in initiating this transformation. However, it must be followed up, and equality must be protected and strengthened through social policies and support, not only in the text of the law but also in the application of the law.Sustainability, progress and development are only possible in societies where all individual traits are embraced with respect and understanding, and where differences can be carried without shame or pride, not as flaws but as wealth. A more just, egalitarian, and humane order must be agreed upon for not only women but also every element of society and the environment to be liberated and to receive their share of the culture of respect they deserve. Each member of society is responsible for contributing to the development of this egalitarian, mutually-respectful environment. Preferring egalitarian and fair concepts in language when speaking, focusing on the continuation of the activity without discriminating between men and women, and acting in a business-focused, not gender-focused, manner are important steps that can have a significant impact. The inclusion of women “as women” in the workforce, without masculinizing them, keeping them under pressure, or expecting them to behave like men, is crucial for the development of trade and society. The power of words for mindset transformation should not be ignored. Words should not be used to capitalize on women’s labor and productivity, but to emphasize the importance of equal representation and contribution of women and men, and to ensure respect for women’s differences. As activist Helen Todd emphasizes, “Bread for all, and Roses, too!”

An Evaluation of the Necessity to Modify Sexist Expressions in the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 in Light of Art. 2/f of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

Kemal

According to the Turkish Civil Code (TCC), a shared regime regarding acquired property is valid between spouses. However, spouses may also choose a different marital property regime regulated by law or make changes to the provisions of these regimes. The death of a spouse is one reason for terminating any type of marital property regime. In this case, the marital property regime that had been valid between spouses must be liquidated. Under Turkish Law, the surviving spouse can receive both the shared claim arising from the liquidation of the property regime as well as the inheritance right regarding the estate, which includes the remaining portion of the residual value in accordance with the characteristics of a tangible case. This is because the idea that the division of a property should be made only according to the provisions of the inheritance law in the event of the dissolution of a marriage by death is not accepted under Turkish Law. Therefore, both the choice of a different marital property regime and an amendment of the provisions of the existing marital property regime may affect the estate and thus the shares reserved for the heirs.The basic principle accepted by Turkish legislation is that marital property agreements concluded between spouses take precedence over the interests of heirs with reserved shares. Although this is the basic principle, two exceptional cases in Section II from Article 237 of the TCC and Section III of Article 276 of the TCC stipulate that marital property agreements must not adversely affect the reserved shares of specific heirs. Both provisions have been doctrinally criticized on the grounds that they disrupt the equality among heirs with reserved shares.Due to Swiss legislation having abolished parents’ reserved shares, the criticism that no discrimination must occur among heirs with reserved shares became unfounded under Section III of Article 241 of the Swiss Civil Code (SCC) and related to Section III in Article 276 of the TCC. Within the scope of the revision, a new paragraph was added to Article 241 of the SCC, and this paragraph regulates that agreements on a different method of division do not apply in the case of the death of a spouse when divorce proceedings are pending that would result in the surviving spouse losing their right to claim the statutory entitlement.On the other hand, the amendment to Article 216 of the SCC is incapable of finalizing any discussions doctrinally. The Draft Law stipulates an increase in the surviving spouse’s share claim arising from a marital property agreement should be added to the hypothetical estate while calculating the reserved shares. Accordingly, the reserved shares of both the common and non-common children are to also be calculated over the same estate. However, legislation makes a distinction again in terms of the possibility of filing an action in abatement for children who are unable to obtain their reserved shares. This amendment could be stated to be fairer compared to the previous situation but to also still be inadequate compared to de lege ferenda. However, during the enactment of the provision, an amendment was made at the last moment that accepted a contribution of more than half of the residual value to not be added to the estate when calculating the reserved shares for the surviving spouse, common children, and their descendants. According to this final version of the provision, which is currently in force, the reserved shares are to be calculated over two different estates.Moreover, legislation regarding Article 532 of the SCC counts an increase in the shares claim among inter vivos legal transactions and subjects it to abatement in the first place among the other inter vivos legal transactions. This situation is consistent with other legal regulations. On the other hand, recognizing the right to file an action in abatement against this acquisition for only certain persons would not be proper. While granting the right to file an action in abatement to non-common children against the same legal transaction, to deny this opportunity to one spouse’s children would be inequitable. In order to protect the non-common children against their parents and the other spouse, increasing the percentage of their reserved share by making a somewhat positive discrimination would be more appropriate.

Protections for the Portion Reserved Against Marital Property Agreements and an Evaluation of the Amendments Relevant to the Swiss Civil Code

Doruk

Assoc. Prof. Dr.

A renunciation of inheritance agreement is a contract between the deceased and the deceased’s presumptive heir that deals with the partial or complete renunciation of the presumptive heir’s inheritance rights.In the event that a party waives their inheritance right by making a waiver agreement while also receiving some advantage in return for the waiver, the onerous inheritance waiver agreement comes into effect. An inheritance renunciation contract has positive aspects such as ensuring the liquidation of the presumptive heir’s inheritance rights while the heir is still alive. However, the inability of the estate to meet its debts at the time the inheritance proceedings begin may cause losses to creditors, for when the onerous waiver agreement has not yet been concluded, the agreed-upon benefit will remain in the estate instead of being used to pay the debts of the estate. However, concluding an onerous waiver agreement both eliminates the responsibility of the one waiving their inheritance from the debts of the estate and ensures that this individual still gains benefit from an estate that is unable to cover its debts.Thus, Article 530 of the Turkish Civil Code aims to eliminate this situation, which exists to the detriment of estate creditors. According to the provision, if the debts of the estate cannot be met by the estate at the time the inheritance proceedings begin and the debts are not paid by the heirs, the individual who has waived the inheritance right and that individual’s heirs become responsible to the creditors of the estate for the amount they had received within five years prior to the death of the deceased in exchange for the renunciation, as well as for the amount of wealth they receive at the time the inheritance proceedings begin.Accordingly, the conditions for applying Article 530 of the Turkish Civil Code and its results can be summarized as follows:<ul><li>At the time the inheritance proceedings begin, the estate must be unable to meet its debts. This situation often arises due to the liabilities of the estate being greater than its assets. However, the condition should be accepted as being fulfilled&nbsp;when debts are not met from the estate for any reason (if the estate is performing weakly), regardless of estate’s assets being greater than its liabilities.</li><li>The debts that are unable to be met from the estate must also not be paid by the heirs.</li><li>A gain must have been left to the person who had onerously waived the inheritance in accordance with the waiver agreement and within five years prior to the death of the deceased. This acquisition can have occurred by means of transferring movable, immovable, or receivables; by giving some sum of money; and/or by paying the debts of the one waiving their inheritance rights.&nbsp;</li><li>In the event these conditions are realized and the one who waived their inheritance is no longer alive, their heirs will become liable to the creditors of the estate.</li><li>These persons have limited liability to the creditors of the estate: 1) The creditors of the estate have the right to demand from these persons the part of their receivables that are unable to be met from the estate and from the heirs. 2) The responsibility of the one who waived their inheritance rights as well as of that person’s heirs to the creditors of the estate is limited to the wealth that is gained at the time the inheritance proceeding begin, as well as the wealth that person had received from the deceased for renouncing inheritance rights within the five years prior the death of the deceased. Thus, the protections provided to creditors by Article 530 of the Turkish Civil Code are seen to not be absolute. This is because even if some amount was found to have been received within the five years prior to the start of the inheritance proceedings, if a gain in wealth no longer occurred based on what was received from this contract regarding the assets at the time the inheritance proceedings began, then neither the one who signed the onerous waiver nor their heirs will be liable for the debts of the estate.</li><li>Unjust enrichment provisions are applied when determining the context of liability. However, the issue here is not a case of unjust enrichment. Within the context of renouncing a valid contract, any received benefits must be returned as per Article 530 of the Turkish Civil Code. A claim can be made against the one who renounced their inheritance rights and that individual’s heirs based on the benefits or revenues they have received and limited to the amount remaining in their hands at the time the inheritance proceedings begin.&nbsp;</li></ul>

Responsibility of the Onerous Inheritance Waiver and Its Heirs Against the Inheritance Creditors

Şehmus

It is the task of the ICC Prosecutor to conduct an initial examination of the available information to determine whether a given situation meets the threshold to warrant a formal ICC investigation. This preliminary examination process may be initiated by a) State Party referral; b) United Nations Security Council referral; or c) the ICC Prosecutor acting proprio motu (without a referral from a State Party or the Security Council). The focus of this study is the Prosecutor’s authority to open a preliminary examination into a situation and to seek the initiation of an investigation based on information on crimes that fall within the jurisdiction of the ICC.This study will first suggest that prosecutorial powers, including the authority to investigate crimes without a referral from a State Party or the Security Council, are not placed in the hands of the ICC Prosecutor without judicial checks. Article 15 of the Rome Statute provides some procedural safeguards such as the requirement to seek authorization from the Pre-Trial Chamber. The judicial scrutiny of the chambers of the Court ensures that the decisions of the ICC Prosecutor are subject to the high threshold criteria set out in the Rome Statute. Safeguards set out in the Rome Statute make it nearly impossible for unfounded or politically motivated accusations to reach the trial stage.&nbsp;The study will then draw attention to the political restraints placed on the ICC Prosecutor by the States whose cooperation is crucial in terms of gathering evidence, arrest of suspects, and accessing witnesses and defendants. As the effective functioning of the Court relies heavily on cooperation with the members of the international community, any reluctance on the part of the States to cooperate with the Office of the Prosecutor limits the ability of the Prosecutor to bring charges against the perpetrators. Consequently, the study will submit that the legal and political restraints placed on the Prosecutor should ally States’ fears about frivolous or political complaints. In this regard, the challenges the new ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan is facing (or is likely to face) will be studied accordingly.This study will claim that the ICC Prosecutor’s ability to initiate investigations proprio motu is in fact a requisite to ensure that the Court is truly effective and free&nbsp;from political interference. The prosecution of the most serious crimes committed in six situations, into which a formal ICC investigation was initiated by the ICC Prosecutor without any referral from a State Party or the Security Council, was possible thanks to the Prosecutor’s authority to act proprio motu. Furthermore, the Prosecutor’s authority to investigate crimes on her own initiative has been instrumental in encouraging national prosecutions. The procedure of examination of national proceedings by a Prosecutor who has the power to investigate complaints proprio motu often serves as an incentive for national authorities to investigate crimes more carefully and competently.&nbsp;Finally, this study will argue that the ICC Prosecutor’s authority to decide whether or not there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, in fact, serves as an early filtering mechanism against politically motivated referrals and against referrals that fail to meet the high threshold of the Rome Statute. The role given to the Prosecutor under the Rome Statute thus prevents any politically motivated State Party or Security Council referrals from turning into formal investigations.

A Critique of the Concerns on the Proprio Motu Powers of the ICC Prosecutor

Trial-avoidance procedures have functioned significantly in varying scopes and degrees in diverse criminal justice systems in common law and civil law countries, particularly over the last three decades. Among such practices, plea-bargaining and its functional equivalents have expanded across the globe. Plea-bargaining shakes the foundations of traditional criminal trials more than any other form of accelerated adjudication. Conventionally, criminal trials aim to establish the material truth through comprehensive inquiries into facts. Yet, recourse to plea-bargaining or institutes that share its fundamental principle of du ut des continues to expand. The substance of such bargains generally entails an exchange of confession or admission of the procedure for a more lenient punishment.The particularities of such procedures are apparently based on the principle of consensus or consent between the parties and differ significantly among jurisdictions. However, a common element unites all variants: the defendant waives the right to a traditional trial and receives a more lenient sentence in return. Such a seemingly appealing exchange would reduce case backlogs and help the judiciary if the inherent inequality of the negotiating parties is disregarded. Dispensing with truth also generally implies a lenient punishment for the guilty but a harsh adjudication for innocent individuals or offenders who could have availed of the opportunity at their trials to tender valid justifications or excuses for their criminal acts. Unsurprisingly, therefore, generations of lawyers have voiced their disagreement with the ascent of plea-bargaining comparatively or in the context of a particular jurisdiction.The present study examines the roots and current state of the German version of plea-bargaining (Verständigung). This practice allows defense counsel to negotiate with a judge so that the defendant can confess to an offense cited in the indictment in exchange for a more lenient sentence than would be meted if the defendant were to contest the charge in a traditional contested trial. The prosecutor holds the right to veto such an agreement. Specifically, the defendant undertakes to confess the cited charges in court, and the court assures in return that it will not exceed an agreed-upon sentence. In the German model, the judge initiates the plea-bargaining procedures, not the prosecutor. Germany is unique in Europe in the implementation of this model of judicial plea-bargaining. The present study begins with a brief overview of the core principles of the 1877 German Criminal Procedural Code. The basic structure of the Code has remained intact despite numerous subsequent amendments. The Code is founded on the principle of immediacy and the notion of the search for truth at a public trial. Indeed, according to para 244 sec. 2 of the Code, the court is charged with ascertaining that all evidence required to discover the truth about a case is produced at trial. The court calls and interrogates witnesses and experts and introduces documentary and real evidence. The German criminal justice system&nbsp;was once dubbed a framework without plea-bargaining because of its dedication to truth in adjudication. Yet, the German version of plea-bargaining developed from the grassroots since the mid-1970s. It was initially shaped by the judiciary as a clandestine practice unknown to legal scholarship. This practice was first illuminated at the beginning of the 1980s. Since then, it indubitably remains the most contested issue of German criminal procedure jurisprudence because the institute of bargaining shakes the fundamental tenets of the German criminal procedural model.&nbsp;Nevertheless, the negotiation of criminal judgments between the court and the parties was acknowledged under specific rules in the jurisprudence of the Federal Court of Germany. Subsequently, the German legislature authorized such negotiations by passing an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code in 2009. The new provisions of the Code systemized the existing jurisprudence to a great extent and were upheld by the German Constitutional Court in 2013. The Court’s decision attempted to regulate and delimit the practice of bargaining through a set of criteria pertaining principally to rules concerning the transparency and documentation of proceedings. Remarkably, a recent empirical study revealed a decline in the practice of plea-bargaining as enshrined in the Code since the 2013 judgment of the Constitutional Court. Thus, the present study probes into the reasons for ongoing informal negotiations conducted outside the ambit of the codified procedures of pleabargaining stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Code.&nbsp;Overall, the current article sequentially discusses the roots of German pleabargaining, the scope of the current legislation, doctrinal debates surrounding the institute, the 2013 judgment of the Constitutional Court, the most recent empirical studies regarding formal and informal bargaining practices, and future probabilities.

Plea-Bargaining in German Criminal Procedure Law

Muzaffer

Lysander Spooner (1808-1887) is an important though oft-neglected figure in 19thcentury American political philosophy. He was an individualist anarchist, political essayist, and entrepreneur known for setting up a private post office in competition with the American government’s public postal services and for writing abolitionist essays. He was also a lawyer and natural law theorist. He developed forceful arguments on behalf of an individualistic conception of natural law philosophy and private property rights in opposition to authoritarian governments, interventionism, legislative and taxative activities, and all forms of paternalism, whether moral, legal, or political.Spooner’s ideas on law are found dispersed among his various writings. One of the best known of these works is The Unconstitutionality of Slavery (1860). Spooner began his argument on the unconstitutionality of slavery with a question: “What is Law?” He answered this by defining law as the “natural, permanent, unalterable principle, which governs any particular thing or class of things” (p.4) “The natural, universal, impartial and inflexible principle, which, under all circumstances, necessarily fixes, determines, defines and governs the civil rights of men” (p. 5) was “simply the rule, principle, obligation or requirement of natural justice” (p. 5). According to Spooner, any so-called legal rules and regulations that are contrary to natural justice have no validity. Spooner reiterated these naturalist views in the following works, one conspicuous one that will be dwelt on here being his pamphlet titled “Natural Law or the Science of Justice: A Treatise on Natural Law, Natural Justice, Natural Rights, Natural Liberty, and Natural Society; Showing That All Legislation Whatsoever is an Absurdity, a Usurpation, and a Crime” (1882). As can be seen in the title, he also generated some radical ideas in this pamphlet against all legislative activities in the context of the formation of a legal system.Another pamphlet he published titled “Vices Are Not Crimes: A Vindication of Moral Liberty” (1875), Spooner drew the line around a behavioral area insusceptible to legislative intervention. In this pamphlet, he objected to criminal legislation that interfered with the inviolable core area of individual liberty, especially those that criminalized vices, moral corruption, or the self-harm actions of an individual such&nbsp;as drunkenness, addiction to gambling, smoking, and idleness. Spooner stated therein (p. 2), “Vices are simply the errors which a man makes in his search after his own happiness. Unlike crimes, they imply no malice toward others, and no interference with their persons or property.” In other words, while crimes are related with infringement on others’ natural rights (e.g., life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness), vices are the errors a man makes in the search for one’s natural right to pursue one’s own happiness. In this way, this viewpoint offers insight into a libertarian conceptualization of the separation of law and morality and of an acceptable form of criminalization regarding some human actions. This also had similarly become apparent in Anglo-Saxon legal philosophy through the Mill-Stephen and Hart-Devlin debates.Some contemporary libertarians and anarcho-capitalists regard Spooner as one of their most influential philosophical predecessors because of his substantial arguments in support of private property rights and natural liberty. However, placing him at the central point of libertarian thought is not easy because of some his skeptical views on contemporary capitalist practices. However, he was a follower of Locke’s natural right philosophy and individual property rights as a natural right, he was also a hard opponent to all forms of involuntary servitude, not just to slavery and other coercive public obligations but also to the wage labor dependencies regarding oligarchic capitalist exploiters. Consistent with these thoughts and doubts, he became an exponent of a private property regime that supports intellectual labor and free entrepreneurship. For an understanding of his conception of property rights in this manner, this article will look at his book titled “The Law of Intellectual Property” (1855).In short, the purpose of this work was to bring Spooner’s concept of law into view through some of his book chapters and pamphlets and by dwelling on Spooner’s previously mentioned theory of natural law. In order to analyze his thoughts regarding law as a holistic term, this article will then examine his views regarding certain fundamental legal concepts involving legality and illegality, such as rights, crimes, misdemeanors, the Constitution, and property rights, which he defined here and there among his various works. Consequently, the article will then try to reveal Spooner’s theory of law, which prioritized the individual as a unique moral being in opposition to all collective bodies such as the state and other authoritative societal institutions. In this way, an anarcho-individualist conception of natural law will be shown to emerge through Spooner’s thoughts and critical works.

An Anarcho-Individualistic Remark on Natural Law: Lysander Spooner and His Theory of Law

Halil

Both administrative and judicial system courts in principle may only decide on matters requested from them. According to this principle, known as the principle of the binding effect of a petition and as a general principle of law, administrative jurisdictions can only make a judgment regarding the matter whose annulment the petition requests. However, administrative courts in practice make exceptions to this rule for zoning plans in particular. Accordingly, if the plan in a lawsuit filed against a zoning plan changes while the lawsuit is still ongoing and the new plan contains the same illegalities that are the subject of the first lawsuit, then the court that hears the case will also assess the legality of the new plan in its proceedings. The Council of State decides whether the zoning plan that is the subject of the lawsuit will change while the lawsuit is ongoing. An expert examination of the new plan should also be made, and whether the reason a lawsuit was filed in the first case occurs in the same way in the new plan should be investigated. The lack of any examination in this direction should be considered a reason for annulment.Administrative jurisdictions examine whether the sole purpose of establishing a new zoning plan is to eliminate the subject in the current case or whether the first and second plans have the same content. After this examination, if the court detects the illegality from the first plan to still exist in the second plan in the same way, then the court will make an exception to the principle of the binding effect of a petition and also declare the illegality of the second plan.In this case, the second plan can be said to not have been annulled; rather, the court has confined itself to evaluating the legality of the second plan, with the principle of the binding effect of petitions not preventing an evaluation of the legality of other acts related to the administrative act in dispute. This situation also does not constitute an exception to the principle of the binding effect of petitions. However, the administrative jurisdictions’ evaluation of the regulatory and individual acts that form the basis of the act under dispute and their inclusion in the ongoing proceedings of a zoning plan that emerged after the plan in dispute and that is not based on it are quite different from each other. In other words, the inclusion of the second plan in the case is not because it involves the subject that is the basis of the dispute. Therefore, while the evaluation of the acts that form the basis of the act under dispute is not an exception to the principle of the binding effect of a petition, the purpose of this&nbsp;judicial practice that has been specifically developed for zoning plans is to determine whether the second plan is actually a new plan or a continuation of the first plan. In this way, it forms an exception to the principle of the binding effect of a petition.A contrario interpretation of this practice for when the content of the second plan is different from that of the first plan (i.e., the issues affecting the plaintiff’s interest in the first plan are resolved in the second plan) involves the purpose of change being accepted and thus leaving the case with no valid subject. In this case, the courts should give a decision of “no need to provide judgment” regarding the first plan. In addition, the second action should be accepted as no continuation of the first plan should other illegalities apart from those alleged in the petition occur, or should an illegality that violates some interest of the plaintiff other than that the first lawsuit.&nbsp;Despite administrative courts including the second plan in the proceedings, if they are going to give an annulment decision, they are to confine themselves to declaring an annulment of the act that is the subject of the lawsuit regarding the operative provisions of judgment. Of course, although the annulment of the second plan is not clearly stated in the judgment, it is clearly understood from the trial and the reasoning of the decision that the second action is also unlawful. This is because the courts have included the second plan into their evaluations based on the second plan essentially being a continuation of the first plan, the contents of the plan being the same in terms of the subject matter of the case, and its inability to accept the abolishment of the first plan. In case of unlawfulness, the courts will also decide to annul this second plan.However, in such a case, difficulties are quite likely to occur regarding how the defendant administrations are to implement the annulment decision. This is because the defendant administrations will claim the annulled plan to have already been repealed, a new zoning plan to have already been found, and no annulment judgment to exist regarding this second zoning plan. For this reason, having the courts declare explicitly the illegality of the second plan by mentioning it in the operative provisions of the judgment is important for the applicability of the court decision.

The Effect of Subjecting Zoning Plan Changes to Annulment During an Active Lawsuit

Hatice

This study aims to examine the disinheritance for criminal reasons comprehensively in accordance with the opinions of doctrine and judicial decisions.According to article 510 of the Turkish Civil Code, for an heir with a reserved share to be disinherited, s/he must either commit a grave crime against the heir or one of his/her relatives, or significantly fail to fulfill his/her obligations arising from family law against the heir or his/her family members.Since neither the article nor its preamble adequately explains what should be understood from these two conditions, it is necessary to refer to judicial decisions and doctrine on issues such as who should be understood as the relative or family member of the heir, which crimes should be considered grave crimes, and what should be understood as the significant nonfulfillment of obligations arising from family law.However, there is no consensus on these issues. Considering the legislator’s attitude about extending the legator’s freedom to disposition, superiority should always be given to the interpretation that facilitates disinheritances in these issues.We can summarize our conclusions based on this principle as follows.In cases where both the reserved shared heir and the legator or his/her relatives are equally defective, the validity of the disinheritance should be accepted by giving precedence to the legator’s will.Even if the victim does not know that the heir with a reserved share is a relative or family member of the benefactor, it should be accepted that the heir with a reserved share can be excluded from the inheritance.The disinheritance should be possible based on the possibility that a reason that has not yet been occurred will occur in the future.For the disinheritance to have a result, the reason must be stated in the disposition mortis causa. Otherwise, the dispositions are fulfilled except for the reserved share&nbsp;of the heir. According to Article 6 of the Turkish Civil Code, if a person has been disinherited objects to the disinheritance decision, the proof of the existence of the reason stated in the disposition falls to the heirs who benefit from the disinheritance.&nbsp;In cases where the existence of the reason cannot be proven, the disposition mortis causa is carried out with the exception of the heir’s reserved share. Likewise, if the reason given in the disposition is insufficient, the same outcome should occur. However, in cases where the inheritor makes a mistake about the reason for disinheritance, the heir with the reserved share can obtain the entire inheritance by proving the error.If the legator, who does not make a new disposition mortis causa, forgives the person s/he disinherited from the inheritance, the heir may obtain his/her reserved share in an action for reduction by proving that the legator has forgiven him/her.Even if the legator forgives the heir, but removes the heir from the inheritance through a disposition mortal causa, the heir’s reserved share is not affected by the disinheritance.If the legator makes a will or designates the disinherited heir as an heir, it must be determined whether these dispositions constitute a remission of the disinheritance.It would not be incorrect to assert that disinheritance for criminal or similar reasons produces different results within and outside inheritance law.&nbsp;

Reasons For Criminal Disinheritance

Mehmet

What must be a child legal statute in contemporary law? Should this limited legal personality apprehended as an “object” that naturally needs protection be considered a legal “subject” within the capacity to realize fully its legal existence? Answers given to this question in contemporary French law reveal that the minors’ legal personality is placed somewhere between these two edges: protection as an object of law and acceptance as a total legal subject. Historically, French law treated the child as a “familial object” from the middle ages to the 19th century. Following the industrial revolution, the emergence of a proletarian class and the rights of juveniles in society and civil law continue to expand, thanks to the profound conceptual and social changes in French Family Law. In addition, the rapid development of international law in the 20th century accelerated this movement and granted teenagers additional rights under public law. Children are protected by several international legal warranties, including those provided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the European Social Charter, the Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (Lanzarote Convention), the European Convention on the Exercise of Children’s Rights, and most importantly, the Convention on the Rights of the Child. In addition, France’s membership in the European Union has given rise to directly invocable legal rights, such as the rights to free movement, to be heard, and to family reunification. Thanks to an effective judicial review in administrative, civil, and constitutional law as well as to a strong judicial dialogue between European and French jurisdictions established since the beginning, the objectivation of children’s legal statute has reached an important degree in its implementation today. However, this notable evolution remains limited, and the legal statute of minors in French law is still mostly characterized by the lack of directly invocable personal rights today. The child is largely apprehended by legal order as a matter of protection rather than a complete legal person fully capable of deploying his or her own rights. Submitted to parental authority, tutors, or other types of guardianship; children’s rights do not totally belong to them, their use is conditional, and their effects are restrained mostly by age limits. Even if this specific treatment of children’s legal personality is not discriminating and morally legitim, the permanent evolution of society, impressive progress of technologies, and undeniable acceleration of young people’s maturity (e.g., in the ecological field) necessitates a modification of contemporary legal thinking regarding children’s rights. Moreover, particularly in France, several deficiencies of domestic law exist, such as the lack of political rights for children; restrictions on their access to the labor market; limitations on their contractual rights, judicial and processual rights; their direct proceedings before a tribunal; and their right to be heard and to consent. Furthermore, the official statistics show the defects in the protection against sexual abuse. In addition, the national law has deficiencies in filiation rules&nbsp;discriminating against children of different types of parents and in the field of family violence, as illustrated by the European Court of Human Rights and the Social Rights Committee’s condemnations of France. Lastly, foreign children residing in France may be deprived of their social rights due to administrative irregularities in the status of their parents under French law, or they may be detained in inhumane conditions. The French immigration laws do not provide sufficient protection for unaccompanied minors. In conclusion, even if the child’s legal statute is still changing and children rights’ content and effectiveness are progressively growing in French domestic law thanks to internal evolution and international guarantees, the French legislator still has a long way to go to improve both the protection of these rights and the modification of handling child legal personality by national law. Children must be increasingly considered as a legal subject of law equal to an adult in terms of their fundamental rights.

Children Rights in France

@JOURNAL_BOX_CURRENT

@JOURNAL_BOX_EARLYVIEW

Ayşe

One of the principles that Civil Procedure Law based on is the “dispositional control of the parties principle”. Under this principle, parties’ have the right solve private law disputes according to their dispositions. Under the principle, dispute parties are free to decide choose or not to choose litigation as way of resolution. Principle also covers to end the dispute by an settlement (in principle). One of the dispute ending options under the principle is the parties settlement agreement. Settlement agreement, generally, is an agreement in which parties agree to ending the dispute with mutual compromise. In other words, it can be also defined as an agreement in which parties completely or partially ending the dispute mutually. Settlement agreement, regulated as an stand alone regulation for the first time in the Article 313/1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) numbered 6100. Under the Article, settlement agreement means that the parties agreement on to ending the dispute completely or partially in an outstanding case. This definition only covers the in-judicial settlement. Because the definition requires a settlement in front of the court. Out of judicial/court settlement is not regulated under the CCP. Because, this kind of settlement fall in the area of the Turkish Code of Obligations. Out of judicial settlement is an agreement out of the court in which the parties agreed to end the dispute completely or partially at mutual interest point they considered. There is no necessity of an outstanding ongoing case process at this point. Additionally, an ongoing trial process would not affect the out of judicial settlement. It is needed a transformation of the out of judicial settlement to an in-judicial settlement to affect an ongoing trial at the same dispute. Out of judicial settlement is an substantive law agreement. This agreement is fall in the provisions (General Provisions) of the Turkish Code of Obligations. Out of judicial settlement agreement is not be need to be made in written because of the “freedom as to form” principle of the Turkish Code of Obligations. If the out of judicial settlement transformed to an in-judicial settlement it could affect an ongoing trial at the same dispute. Parties convey the out of judicial settlement to the court and then court get in record the agreement. After that moment, out of judicial settlement is evaluated as an in-judicial settlement. It is not needed that the whole provisions of the out of judicial settlement to get in recorded in the trial documents. Article 315/1 of the CCP regulates the provisions on effects and solutions of settlement agreements. Under this provisions when the out of judicial settlement transformed to an in-judicial settlement it would has the same legal power and&nbsp;solutions of it. The first solution of this transformation is the ending of existing dispute, in other words ending of the existing court trial. The second important outcome of the in-judicial settlement agreement is that it would have the same legal effect of final court decision. In-judicial settlement has an important another legal effect that it would has the power of the final court decisions under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code Article 38. If the out of judicial settlement transformed to an in-judicial settlement it would has the same affect as well.

Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial

Involvement of persons with disabilities in business life is extremely important – just as much as in their access to education and health services - and in their enjoyment of social protection because unemployment makes individuals becoming unemployed feel like they are useless. Involvement of persons with disabilities in business life, and pursuing the same eliminates the social effects caused by the risk of unemployment. In addition, working persons with disabilities benefit from social insurance protection based on their work, and thus a decrease occurs in the expenses made for persons with disabilities from the social security budget. While the policies relevant to persons with disabilities started with passive policies such as protecting persons with disabilities, today they have transformed into active policies such as ensuring the complete participation of persons with disabilities in employment. In Turkey, the number of persons with disabilities recorded on the National Database on Persons with Disabilities is 2.461.828 for the first half of the year 2019. And the rate of participation of persons with disabilities in employment is 22.1 percent. When compared with the data for the EU and OECD, this number is very low. Thus, increasing the participation in employment of persons with disabilities is also among the objectives relevant to business life. When the legal regulations in Turkey are examined, it can be observed that rules relevant to the protection of persons with disabilities have taken place in Constitutional Law for the first time. According to Article 17 of Constitutional Law, everyone has the right to live, and to preserve and improve their material and moral presence. And, according to Article 49 of Constitutional Law, working is everyone’s right and obligation. The government takes the required measures to increase the standard of living of employees, protect the unemployed, and support working. The government’s actualization of this obligation is especially important in terms of persons with disabilities who are experiencing many difficulties in involvement in business life. For this reason, it is required that the government should take special measures for persons with disabilities, and to provide the work environment for them. Hence, in Article 50 of Constitutional Law, it has been emphasized that no one could be employed in works not conforming to their strength, and the rule of “the ones having physical and psychological insufficiency are distinctively protected in terms of working conditions” has been established. And the most basic law regarding persons with disabilities is the Law on Persons with Disabilities no 5378. This law intends that persons with disabilities should benefit from fundamental rights and freedoms, and to ensure their participation in social life under equal conditions with other individuals. Article 30 of Labour Law no 4857 regulates the details relevant to the liability of employers to employ persons&nbsp;with disabilities. Article 30 was regulated again in 2008, and new principles were established regarding the employment of persons with disabilities. In accordance with this, employers employing fifty or more employees in the workplace have to employ a specific number of persons with disabilities. When Article 30 of Labour Law is examined, it is observed that the straightforward quota method has been adopted regarding the employment of persons with disabilities. The quota determined within this scope is three percent for workplaces in the private sector, and four percent for workplaces in the public sector. It is required that the following conditions are present for liability of the employer to employ persons with disabilities to arise : i) The workplace’s inclusion in the scope of Labour Law, or Maritime Labour Law, ii) Employment of fifty or more employees in the workplace. In case of the presence of these conditions, the employers are required to employ persons with disabilities whose rate of disability is at least 40 percent. Persons with disabilities should be employed through the Turkish Employment Agency. But the employer may also employ a person with disabilities through his own means. In this case, it is required to inform the Turkish Employment Agency, and to have the person with disabilities recorded at the Agency. An administrative fine is imposed on the employer acting against the liability of employing persons with disabilities. Another method regarding the employment of persons with disabilities is the concept of sheltered employment. Briefly, this method is ensuring the employment of persons with disabilities – for whom it is difficult to bring them in business life - within the frame of special conditions. In this system, there are sheltered workplaces where the working environment is specifically arranged in order to ensure the employment of persons with disabilities. In Turkish Law, the principles of this subject have been regulated in the Law on Persons with Disabilities, and in a certain regulation issued on this subject. That Regulation first came into force in 2006, and it was renewed in 2013. Persons with disabilities who will be employed at sheltered workplaces, are not only persons with physical disabilities but persons with mental and psychological disabilities. In terms of acquiring the status of a sheltered workplace, some conditions have been sought by the Regulation. Above all, it is required that the workplace is one which holds the qualifications determined by the Regulation, and where at least eight persons with disabilities are employed. In addition, the ratio of the number of persons with disabilities who will be employed at a sheltered workplace to the number of total employees shouldn’t be less than seventy five percent. In the Regulation, the physical conditions and equipment that the sheltered workplace has to have (safety, traffic safety, fire protection etc.) were also specified. A specific part of the remunerations&nbsp;of the persons with disabilities being employed at sheltered workplaces is paid by the government. In Turkish law, amendments made in time in Article 30 of Labour Law being the basis of the liability of employing persons with disabilities, and especially the increase in incentives for the employers in private sector are deemed as proper regulations. Again, allowing the employers to find workers who will be employed by their own means is also among those steps which would facilitate employment. Certainly, considering the measures ensuring employment as incentives rather than a quota and fine method would be a more constructive approach.

The Liability of the Employer to Employ Disabled Employee

@JOURNAL_BOX_FEATURED

Night work has been the subject of many discussions due to its contradictory nature to the biological structure of the human body. This attribute of night work requires that night work and day work should not be handled in the same way in the legal order. The developments in the field of Occupational Health and Safety Law, and the researches regarding the effects of night work on the human health, constantly demand the review and improvement of the regulations regarding night work. In this regard, the most important protective provision regarding the workers working at night could be the limit on the night working time. In accordance with the Article 69 (I) of the Labour Law No. 4857, “night” is defined as the period starting at the latest at 20.00 in the evening, and lasting at the earliest until 06.00 in the morning, which in any case lasts maximum eleven hours. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 69 (III), night work shall not exceed seven and a half hours. However, significant exceptions have been recently adopted to this rule. The amendment, enacted in 2015, allows employers in some sectors (private security, tourism and jobs related to healthcare) to demand night work in excess of seven and a half hours by obtaining written approval from the worker. It should be noted that the regulations concerning night work are particularly important regarding the work carried out by shift work. Taking into consideration the need for governing special procedures and principles on this subject, a regulation specifically on shift work has been issued, and exceptions to the rule on the limit of the night working time are also included in this regulation. In my opinion, the propriety of this change amendment is highly debatable. It can be argued that the service should continue uninterruptedly in the sectors mentioned in the Article (private security, tourism and jobs related to healthcare). However, the employment of the workers for longer periods is not the only way to ensure the continuity of the service. Although written approval of the worker enabling the night work in excess of seven and a half hours is stipulated, the worker-protective approach of the Labour Law which protects the workers even from themselves, especially on the issues regarding occupational health and safety should not be disregarded. It should also be noted that the Regulation on shift work also includes a statement which is not included in the text of the Labour Law. In the Regulation; it is prescribed that the workers employed by the subcontractor in the workplaces, where private security, tourism and health services are carried out, also fall under this scope. If the letter of the statement is followed; it could be concluded that all workers employed by the subcontractor in the health, tourism and private security sectors may be employed at night for more than seven and a half hours. However, it is clear that such an interpretation would be incompatible with the exception regulated in the Labour&nbsp;Law. The provision of the regulation should be interpreted in a manner to cover subcontractor workers who are employed in the sectors referred to in the Labour Law, specifically in cases where subcontracted work is carried out with respect to these sectors. It has been concluded that the recent changes in the field of night work constitute a reversal in terms of workers’ rights. It is clear that the continuity of the services without disruption can be also maintained by increasing the number of shifts. Furthermore, I would like to draw attention to the fact that the regulations regarding night work are quite disorganized. In this regard, it may be suggested that all the rules regarding night work should fall into a single regulation. As a result, it may be stated that there is a need for the review of the regulations on night work in our legislation.

Night Work and The Evaluation of the Amendments Regarding the Limit of Night Work Period

Cemile

This article deals with multi-tier dispute resolution clauses incorporating both mediation and arbitration together under Turkish Law. I use the terminology of “med-arb” not only for the situation where the mediator acts as an arbitrator, but rather in a general meaning covering all instances where the arbitration is commenced following an unsuccessful mediation. The purpose of this article is to discuss the validity of the med-arb agreements, the consequences of starting arbitration before the mediation fails, the effects of the mediation proceedings and of the mediator acting as an arbitrator on the arbitration that follows the mediation as well as the admissibility of the documents and factual evidence exchanged at the mediation. For the purpose of this article, the comparative laws, international ethics rules, international guidelines on the conflict of interest and admissibility of evidence are reviewed along with Turkish law. Turkish Code on Mediation in Civil Law Disputes stipulates some provisions related to the med-arb. These provisions shall apply equally to both domestic and international arbitrations where the place of arbitration is Turkey. Following the jurisprudence of the Turkish Supreme Court, a med-arb agreement is valid only if it reflects, without doubt, both parties’ consents to the arbitration following the failure of the mediation proceedings. Therefore, a multi-tier dispute resolution clause subject to Turkish law needs to be drawn carefully. In this respect IBA Guidelines for Drafting International Arbitration Clauses are of assistance. In cases where one of the parties commences arbitration without a recourse to mediation first, the arbitral tribunal should make a decision on the admissibility of the claim. There is no direct provision related to the question of admissibility under Turkish law. Under Turkish law, in parallel with the practice of international arbitration, the tribunal has to interpret the med-arb agreement to make a decision on the question of whether the recourse to mediation is a pre-condition of the arbitration. If the mediation is a pre-condition, then the tribunal should suspend the arbitral&nbsp;proceedings and direct the parties to the mediation. However, in the case that the mediation fails, the tribunal may resume the arbitral proceedings. There is nothing under Turkish law suggesting that a precondition of arbitration is a jurisdictional issue rather than an admissibility issue. The advantages of the med-arb are subject to heated debates among people holding different perspectives. Such advantages are controversial since when a dispute arises and the arbitration starts without a recourse to mediation, the respondent may object to the jurisdiction of the tribunal or to the admissibility of the claim relying on the fact that the pre-condition to try mediation first is not met. Such an objection may cause arbitration to be delayed and/or the costs of arbitration to increase. Therefore, before opting for a med-arb agreement the parties should evaluate the possibility of settling their dispute at the Med-arb. The parties who are able to consider their commercial interests do not need a med-arb agreement as they are able to settle the disputes without the assistance of a mediator. They first try to settle the dispute, in some cases for years, and to avoid adjudication by an arbitral tribunal. They only start arbitration when there is no possibility of settlement of their dispute and of saving their commercial alliance. In such cases, med-arb agreements become a tool to delay the proceedings and increase the costs for the claimant to force him or her to give up his or her claim. Having said that, for the parties who are unable to consider their commercial interest and unable to avoid adjudication, med-arb agreement may be the right dispute resolution clause. In a med-arb agreement, the parties may wish the mediator to act as their arbitrator if the mediation fails. Neither the Turkish Code of Mediation in Civil Disputes nor the Turkish International Arbitration Code prevents a mediator to act as an arbitrator. Turkish Ethics Rules for Mediators stipulate that a mediator may act as an arbitrator only if the parties have agreement in writing. Therefore, any mediator to act as arbitrator needs to have the parties’ written consent. In international mediation and arbitration practices, the scholars and practitioners widely accept that having an arbitrator who previously acted as a mediator generates a number of serious risks and concerns. First of all, the mediator-arbitrator may not protect his or her impartiality in the arbitration because of the facts that she or he became aware of during the mediation. Secondly, the mediator-arbitrator may rely on the confidential information exchanged in caucus while making the award. Thirdly, the mediator may be too willing to act as an arbitrator and as a result the mediation may prematurely fail. Finally, the mediator may abuse his or her powers and force the parties to settle their disputes as the mediator suggests. The parties may feel that if they are not able to settle their dispute and proceed to the arbitration, the mediator-arbitrator would make an arbitral award in parallel of the recommendations at the mediation phase. Considering the severity of the consequences, if the parties agree to have an arbitrator&nbsp;who previously acted as their mediator, they need to be aware of such consequences and they need to make an informed decision accordingly . The Turkish Code of Mediation in Civil Law Disputes restrains the ability of the mediator-arbitrator to rely on the documents produced during the mediation for the purpose of settlement and defines which documents are in this category. In the case where the mediator-arbitrator relies on these documents while making the award, depending on the extent the document or information has a bearing on the award, the arbitral award may be cancelled, or its enforcement may be refused. In November 2019, Istanbul Arbitration Center (ISTAC) introduced its Medarb Rules. ISTAC Med-arb Rules are the first published institutional Med-arb rules. ISTAC Med-arb Rules reflect the best practices in international mediation – arbitration. I believe that ISTAC Med-arb Rules will be welcomed in the field of international dispute resolution.

Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses Incorporating Both Mediation and Arbitration Together Under Turkish Law

@JOURNAL_BOX_MOSTREAD

Istanbul Law Review is a publication of Istanbul University, Faculty of Law.  

Istanbul Law Review is a quarterly, academic, peer reviewed journal which publishes articles in Turkish and English. Istanbul Law Review publishes articles, judicial reviews, legislation analysis’, publication criticism, translations which involves in law and law related subjects, and are based on genuine theoretical and practical academic research and suitable for national and international scale.

Istanbul Law Review involves in publications which are (i) capable of expanding theory and enhancing theoretical basis, (ii) analyzing either academic or judicial methodology, (iii) scrutinizing legal theory, practice, process, symbols etc. effecting society on private or public levels, (iv) exploring the subject in legal, sociological, political, psychological, philosophical, ethical, geographical and historical manner.

All expenses of the journal are covered by the Istanbul University. Processing and publication are free of charge with the journal. There is no article processing charges or submission fees for any submitted or accepted articles.

Fethi

Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)

EBSCO

ERIH PLUS

TR Dizin

DOAJ

SOBIAD

@METRIC_VOLUMES

@METRIC_ISSUES

@METRIC_ARTICLES

@METRIC_OPENACCESS

Istanbul Law Review

@INFO_TAB_ABOUT

Editor in Chief

Co Editor in Chief

Language Editor

Editor

@INFO_TAB_BOARDS

Istanbul Law Review is a quarterly, academic, peer reviewed journal which publishes articles in Turkish and English. Istanbul Law Review publishes articles, judicial reviews, legislation analysis’, publication criticism, translations which involves in law and law related subjects, and are based on genuine theoretical and practical academic research and suitable for national and international scale.Istanbul Law Review involves in publications which are (i) capable of expanding theory and enhancing theoretical basis, (ii) analyzing either academic or judicial methodology, (iii) scrutinizing legal theory, practice, process, symbols etc. effecting society on private or public levels, (iv) exploring the subject in legal, sociological, political, psychological, philosophical, ethical, geographical and historical manner.In this frame, primary fields of interest are listed as follows:• Human rights law,• Criminal law,• Financial and fiscal law,• Civil law,• Commercial law,• Obligations law,• Execution and bankruptcy law

Aim and Scope

Web of Science - Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)TÜBİTAK-ULAKBİM TR Index EBSCO Central &amp; Eastern European Academic SourceEBSCO Legal SourceDOAJERIH PLUSSOBİAD

Indexing and Abstracting

The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and pays regard to Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing published by the <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, the <a href="https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/#principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)</a>, the <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a>, and the <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> on <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing</a> The subjects covered in the manuscripts submitted to the Journal for publication must be in accordance with the aim and scope of the Journal. Only those manuscripts approved by every individual author and that were not published before in or sent to another journal, are accepted for evaluation.Changing the name of an author (omission, addition or order) in papers submitted to the Journal requires written permission of all declared authors.Plagiarism, duplication, fraud authorship/denied authorship, research/data fabrication, salami slicing/salami publication, breaching of copyrights, prevailing conflict of interest are unethical behaviors. All manuscripts not in accordance with the accepted ethical standards will be removed from the publication. This also contains any possible malpractice discovered after the publication. Plagiarism Submitted manuscripts that pass preliminary control are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. If plagiarism/self-plagiarism will be found authors will be informed. Editors may resubmit manuscript for similarity check at any peer-review or production stage if required. High similarity scores may lead to rejection of a manuscript before and even after acceptance. Depending on the type of article and the percentage of similarity score taken from each article, the overall similarity score is generally expected to be less than 15 or 20%. Double Blind Peer-Review After plagiarism check, the eligible ones are evaluated by the editors-in-chief for their originality, methodology, the importance of the subject covered and compliance with the journal scope. The editor provides a fair double-blind peer review of the submitted articles and hands over the papers matching the formal rules to at least two national/international referees for evaluation and gives green light for publication upon modification by the authors in accordance with the referees’ claims.

Policies

The journal is an open access journal and all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Except for commercial purposes, users are allowed to read, download, copy, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the <a href="https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read" target="_blank">BOAI</a> definition of open access.The open access articles in the journal are licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.en" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) license.

All expenses of the journal are covered by the Istanbul University. Processing and publication are free of charge with the journal. There is no article processing charges or submission fees for any submitted or accepted articles.

Authors publishing with the journal retain the copyright to their work licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" target="_blank">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/</a> ) and grant the Publisher non-exclusive commercial right to publish the work. CC BY-NC 4.0 license permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Editor should consider publishing correction if minor errors that do not effect the results, interpretations and conclusions of the published paper are detected. Editor should consider retraction if major errors and/or misconduction that invalidate results and conclusions are detected.Editor should consider issuing an expression of concern if there is evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors; there is evidence that the findings are not reliable and institutions of the authors do not investigate the case or the possible investigation seems to be unfair or nonconclusive. The guidelines of <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english" target="_blank">COPE</a> and <a href="https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/" target="_blank">ICJME</a> are taken into consideration regarding correction, retractions or expression of concern.

To guarantee that all papers published in the journal are maintained and permanently accessible, articles are stored in Dergipark which serves as a  national archival web site and at the same time permits LOCKSS to  collect, preserve, and serve the content.Additionally, authors are encouraged to self-archive the final PDF version of their articles in open electronic archives with  that conform to standards of Open Archives Initiative (<a href="https://www.openarchives.org/" target="_blank">https://www.openarchives.org/</a>). Authors should provide a link from the deposited version to the URL of IUPress journal website.

Istanbul Law Review is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and pays regard to Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing published by the <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, the <a href="https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/#principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)</a>, the <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a>, and the <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> on <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing</a>All parties involved in the publishing process (Editors, Reviewers, Authors and Publishers) are expected to agree on the following ethical principles.All submissions must be original, unpublished (including as full text in conference proceedings), and not under the review of any other publication synchronously. Each manuscript is reviewed by one of the editors and at least two referees under double-blind peer review process. Plagiarism, duplication, fraud authorship/denied authorship, research/data fabrication, salami slicing/salami publication, breaching of copyrights, prevailing conflict of interest are unnethical behaviors.All manuscripts not in accordance with the accepted ethical standards will be removed from the publication. This also contains any possible malpractice discovered after the publication. In accordance with the code of conduct we will report any cases of suspected plagiarism or duplicate publishing.

Ethics

<div>The journal adheres to the highest standards in research ethics and follows the principles of international research ethics as defined below. The authors are responsible for the compliance of the manuscripts with the ethical rules.- Principles of integrity, quality and transparency should be sustained in designing the research, reviewing the design and conducting the research.- The research team and participants should be fully informed about the aim, methods, possible uses and requirements of the research and risks of participation in research.- The confidentiality of the information provided by the research participants and the confidentiality of the respondents should be ensured. The research should be designed to protect the autonomy and dignity of the participants.- Research participants should participate in the research voluntarily, not under any coercion.- Any possible harm to participants must be avoided. The research should be planned in such a way that the participants are not at risk.- The independence of research must be clear; and any conflict of interest or must be disclosed.- In experimental studies with human subjects, written informed consent of the participants who decide to participate in the research must be obtained. In the case of children and those under wardship or with confirmed insanity, legal custodian’s assent must be obtained.- If the study is to be carried out in any institution or organization, approval must be obtained from this institution or organization.- In studies with human subject, it must be noted in the method’s section of the manuscript that the informed consent of the participants and ethics committee approval from the institution where the study has been conducted have been obtained.</div>

It is authors’ responsibility to ensure that the article is in accordance with scientific and ethical standards and rules. And authors must ensure that submitted work is original. They must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere or is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere, in any language. Applicable copyright laws and conventions must be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) must be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources must be appropriately credited and referenced.All the authors of a submitted manuscript must have direct scientific and academic contribution to the manuscript. The author(s) of the original research articles is defined as a person who is significantly involved in “conceptualization and design of the study”, “collecting the data”, “analyzing the data”, “writing the manuscript”, “reviewing the manuscript with a critical perspective” and “planning/conducting the study of the manuscript and/or revising it”. Fund raising, data collection or supervision of the research group are not sufficient roles to be accepted as an author. The author(s) must meet all these criteria described above. The order of names in the author list of an article must be a co-decision and it must be indicated in the <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/BD7F3551BBE543F7A0E7628427A827AE" target="_blank">Copyright Agreement Form.</a> The individuals who do not meet the authorship criteria but contributed to the study must take place in the acknowledgement section. Individuals providing technical support, assisting writing, providing a general support, providing material or financial support are examples to be indicated in acknowledgement section.All authors must disclose all issues concerning financial relationship, conflict of interest, and competing interest that may potentially influence the results of the research or scientific judgment.When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published paper, it is the author’s obligation to promptly cooperate with the Editor to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts for their scientific content without regard to ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religious belief or political philosophy of the authors. He/She provides a fair double-blind peer review of the submitted articles for publication and ensures that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential before publishing.Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication. He/She must publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.Editor-in-Chief does not allow any conflicts of interest between the authors, editors and reviewers. Only he has the full authority to assign a reviewer and is responsible for final decision for publication of the manuscripts in the Journal.Reviewers must have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the research funders. Their judgments must be objective.Reviewers must ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential and must report to the editor if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s side.A reviewer who feels unqualified to review the topic of a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. The reviewers and editorial board cannot discuss the manuscripts with other persons. The anonymity of the referees must be ensured. In particular situations, the editor may share the review of one reviewer with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.

Only those manuscripts approved by its every individual author and that were not published before in or sent to another journal, are accepted for evaluation.Submitted manuscripts that pass preliminary control are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. After plagiarism check, the eligible ones are evaluated by editor-in-chief for their originality, methodology, the importance of the subject covered and compliance with the journal scope.The editor hands over the papers matching the formal rules to at least two national/international referees for double-blind peer review evaluation and gives green light for publication upon modification by the authors in accordance with the referees’ claims.

Peer Review

Only those manuscripts approved by its every individual author and that were not published before in or sent to another journal, are accepted for evaluation.Submitted manuscripts that pass preliminary control are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. After plagiarism check, the eligible ones are evaluated by Editor-in-Chief for their originality, methodology, the importance of the subject covered and compliance with the journal scope. Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts for their scientific content without regard to ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religious belief or political philosophy of the authors and ensures a fair double-blind peer review of the selected manuscripts.The selected manuscripts are sent to at least two national/international referees for evaluation and publication decision is given by Editor-in-Chief upon modification by the authors in accordance with the referees’ claims.Editor-in-Chief does not allow any conflicts of interest between the authors, editors and reviewers and is responsible for final decision for publication of the manuscripts in the Journal.Reviewers’ judgments must be objective. Reviewers’ comments on the following aspects are expected while conducting the review.- Does the manuscript contain new and significant information?- Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the manuscript?- Is the problem significant and concisely stated?- Are the methods described comprehensively?- Are the interpretations and consclusions justified by the results?- Is adequate references made to other Works in the field?- Is the language acceptable?Reviewers must ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential and must report to the editor if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s side.A reviewer who feels unqualified to review the topic of a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. The reviewers and editorial board cannot discuss the manuscripts with other persons. The anonymity of the referees is important.

1. Istanbul Law Review is a peer reviewed Journal that is published four times a year (in March, June, September and December) and indexed by ESCI and ULAKBİM.2. The articles sent to be published in our journal should not be published elsewhere, not be submitted to other journals simultaneously even with the purpose of evaluation. In this purpose, the authors shall also be reguired to sign a letter of undertaking. 3. Articles that are considered as unsuitable with the publication principles by the Editorial Board are sent back to the author without review. It is sufficient for the article to be rejected by the Editorial Board if the spelling errors are extraordinary, the domestic and foreign resources required for the subject being examined are not utilized, the scientific criteria academic ethical principles are not complied with, the article subject does not have an up-to-date significance in terms of theory and-or practice. 4. Before the article is sent to the referees, it is subjected to plagiarism examination withthe help of special computer programs. If the digital similarity rate is above 20%, it is sufficient for the rejection of the article within the scope of the editorial review of the related software report. 5. The article to be published in the journal must be written following the highest academic standards. In this context, intellectual background and effort at the level of doctoral or associate professorship thesis are expected from the authors. 6. Papers that are approved by the Editorial Board are submitted to reviewers in line with blind peer review principle. Authors are not informed about the identity of the referees. According to the assessments of the referees, the paper may be approved for publication, required to resubmission with amendments or rejected on the basis of inadequate quality. The referee phase does not have a minimum or maximum duration. The follow-up of this issue is a duty and authority exclusively belonging to the Editorial Board. 7. As a result of the referee reports, the final discretion and responsibility regarding whether the article will be finally published and if it will be published, in which issue of the Journal, the editorial board is responsible. The existence of a single rejectionnegative referee report is sufficient to prevent the article from being published. 8. The completion of the referee stage does not give authors the authority to request a private or official document indicating that the article will be published. The authors, with the awareness and responsibility of this issue, apply for their articles to be published in Istanbul Law Review and to be subjected to peer review. 9. Authors, must provide their titles, institutions, correspondence address, phone number and e-mail address. 10. The Review accepts and publishes articles written in Turkish and English. The articles must include Turkish and English abstracts consisting of at least 250 and at most 300 words and at least five and at most fifteen keywords must be added to the paper in Turkish and English languages. Following the abstracts, there must also be an extended summary of 600-800 words for all the articles both in English and Turkish. The article subject to the publication application must contain a maximum of 20,000 words, including footnotes. There is no minimum word limit. 11. The main text and footnotes must be written in Times New Roman. Font size for the main text should be 12 with 1,5 line spacing while footnotes are written in font size 10 with 1 line spacing. Footnotes are to be shown at the bottom of the page. Citations must be made based on the OSCOLA citation system. Otherwise, the article is sent back to the author to make corrections without a referee assignment. Abbreviations and other issues in Turkish articles must be made following the announced spelling rules. The mentioned citation rules can be accessed at https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ihm. 12. Author’s name must be written bottom right of the Turkish and English title of the paper and should end with a star symbol. Star footnote should consists of title and institution of the author and correspondence address, phone number and e- mail address. 13. The article must consist of a bibliography at the end and references need to be arranged in alphabetical order.14. To be limited with the copies published by the Faculty; financial rights regarding reproduction, distribution, public performance, derivative works and translation of the papers which are approved for publication are to be transferred to the faculty to be used on the print, auditory, digital etc. media, nationwide and worldwide. Authors accept not to receive any royalty payment.15. Besides articles, also translations may be published in the accepted languages. These papers might be approved or rejected by the Editorial Board. Original text of the translation and consent of the rightful owner are also should be enclosed with the translation. Translations are also subject to the assessment of reviewers.16. Papers should be sent to iuhfdergiler@istanbul.edu.tr in Microsoft Word (*.doc, *.docx) file type.17. Only one article of an applicant in the same publication year (4 issues) could be subject to peer review.18. The Editorial Board determines the articles to be included in one issue of the journal by considering criteria such as the purpose of maintaining the balance of Private LawPublic Law, the date of submission of the article to the Journal, the date of completion of the referee stage, the timeliness of the article subject, and the proportional balance on whether the authors are members of Istanbul University.19. The Editorial Board makes the utmost effort to publish all issues with the same number of articles as possible. An article that has completed all the necessary steps for publication, including the layout stage, as of the date of publication of an issue, could not be published in the relevant issue in terms of the number of articles, however, after a certain period after the relevant issue, within the framework of the system called Online-First it is published digitally before the issue is released.

Author Guidelines

Before beginning the online submission process please read the Information for Authors and make sure you have the followings available:Article submissions should be submitted directly to the e-mail address <a href="mailto:iuhfdergiler@istanbul.edu.tr" target="_blank">iuhfdergiler@istanbul.edu.tr</a>Cover letter to the editor<ul type="disc"> <ul type="circle"> <li>The category of the manuscript</li> <li>Confirming that “the paper is not under consideration for publication in another journal”.</li> <li>Including disclosure of any commercial or financial involvement.</li> <li>Confirming that the statistical design of the research article is reviewed.</li> <li>Confirming that last control for fluent English was done.</li> <li>Confirming that journal policies detailed in Information for Authors have been reviewed.</li> <li>Confirming that the references cited in the text and listed in the references section are in line with OSCOLA.</li> </ul> </ul><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/BD7F3551BBE543F7A0E7628427A827AE" target="_blank">Copyright Agreement Form</a>Permission of previous published material if used in the present manuscript<a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/6444C75BA6B344EBB1496510B0BAF8A3" target="_blank">Title page</a><ul type="disc"> <ul type="circle"> <li>The category of the manuscript</li> <li>The title of the manuscript both in the languge of the manuscript and in English</li> <li>All authors’ names and affiliations (institution, faculty/department, city, country), e-mail addresses</li> <li>Corresponding author’s email address, full postal address, telephone and fax number</li> <li>ORCIDs of all authors.</li> </ul> </ul>Main Manuscript Document<ul type="disc"> <ul type="circle"> <li>The title of the manuscript both in the language of manuscript and in English</li> <li>Abstracts: 250-30 words</li> <li>Key words: 5-15 words </li> <li>Extended Abstract (600-1000 words) in English (for the articles which are not in English)</li> <li>Main article sections</li> <li>Grant Support (if exists)</li> <li>Conflict of Interest (if exists)</li> <li>Acknowledgement (if exits)</li> <li>References</li> <li>All tables, illustrations (figures) (including title, description, footnotes)</li> </ul> </ul>

Although references to review articles can be an efficient way to guide readers to a body of literature, review articles do not always reflect original work accurately. Readers should therefore be provided with direct references to original research sources whenever possible. On the other hand, extensive lists of references to original work on a topic can use excessive space on the printed page. Small numbers of references to key original papers often serve as well as more exhaustive lists, particularly since references can now be added to the electronic version of published papers, and since electronic literature searching allows readers to retrieve published literature efficiently. Papers accepted but not yet included in the issue are published online in the Early View section and they should be cited as “advance online publication”. Citing a “personal communication” should be avoided unless it provides essential information not available from a public source, in which case the name of the person and date of communication should be cited in parentheses in the text. For scientific articles, written permission and confirmation of accuracy from the source of a personal communication must be obtained.Reference Style and FormatIstanbul Law Review offers referencing style OSCOLA. OSCOLA (Oxford Standard for the Citation of Legal Authorities) is published by the University of Oxford and detail and examples about the style can be found at https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/research-subject-groups/publications/oscolaOSCOLA Reference ExamplesPrimary SourcesDo not use full stops in abbreviations. Separate citations with a semi-colon.CasesGive the party names, followed by the neutral citation, followed by the Law Reports citation (eg AC, Ch, QB). If there is no neutral citation, give the Law Reports citation followed by the court in brackets. If the case is not reported in the Law Reports, cite the All ER or the WLR, or failing that a specialist report.Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd [2008] UKHL 13, [2008] 1 AC 884.R (Roberts) v Parole Board [2004] EWCA Civ 1031, [2005] QB 410.Page v Smith [1996] AC 155 (HL).When pinpointing, give paragraph numbers in square brackets at the end of the citation. If the judgment has no paragraph numbers, provide the page number pinpoint after the court.Callery v Gray [2001] EWCA Civ 1117, [2001] 1 WLR 2112 [42], [45].Bunt v Tilley [2006] EWHC 407 (QB), [2006] 3 All ER 336 [1]–[37].R v Leeds County Court, ex p Morris [1990] QB 523 (QB) 530–31.If citing a particular judge:Arscott v The Coal Authority [2004] EWCA Civ 892, [2005] Env LR 6 [27] (Laws LJ).Statutes and statutory instrumentsAct of Supremacy 1558.Human Rights Act 1998, s 15(1)(b).Penalties for Disorderly Behaviour (Amendment of Minimum Age) Order 2004, SI 2004/3166.EU legislation and casesConsolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union [2008] OJ C115/13.Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings(EC Merger Regulation) [2004] OJ L24/1, art 5.Case C–176/03 Commission v Council [2005] ECR I–7879, paras 47–48.European Court of Human RightsOmojudi v UK (2009) 51 EHRR 10.Osman v UK ECHR 1998–VIII 3124.Balogh v Hungary App no 47940/99 (ECHR, 20 July 2004).Simpson v UK (1989) 64 DR 188.Secondary SourcesBooksGive the author’s name in the same form as in the publication, except in bibliographies, where you should give only the surname followed by the initial(s). Give relevant information about editions, translators and so forth before the publisher, and give page numbers at the end of the citation, after the brackets.Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (first published 1651, Penguin 1985) 268.Gareth Jones, Goff and Jones: The Law of Restitution (1st supp, 7th edn, Sweet &amp; Maxwell 2009).K Zweigert and H Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law (Tony Weir tr, 3rd edn, OUP 1998).Contributions to edited booksFrancis Rose, ‘The Evolution of the Species’ in Andrew Burrows and Alan Rodger (eds),Mapping the Law: Essays in Memory of Peter Birks (OUP 2006).EncyclopediasHalsbury’s Laws (5th edn, 2010) vol 57, para 53.Journal articlesPaul Craig, ‘Theory, “Pure Theory” and Values in Public Law’ [2005] PL 440.When pinpointing, put a comma between the first page of the article and the page pinpoint.JAG Griffith, ‘The Common Law and the Political Constitution’(2001) 117 LQR 42, 64.Online journalsGraham Greenleaf, ‘The Global Development of Free Access to Legal Information’ (2010)1(1) EJLT &lt; http://ejlt.org//article/view/17 &gt; accessed 27 July 2010.Command papers and Law Commission reportsDepartment for International Development, Eliminating World Poverty: Building our Common Future (White Paper, Cm 7656, 2009) ch 5.Law Commission, Reforming Bribery (Law Com No 313, 2008) paras 3.12–3.17.Websites and blogsSarah Cole, ‘Virtual Friend Fires Employee’ (Naked Law, 1 May 2009)&lt;www.nakedlaw.com/2009/05/index.html&gt; accessed 19 November 2009.Newspaper articlesJane Croft, ‘Supreme Court Warns on Quality’ Financial Times (London, 1 July 2010) 3.

<div><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/2BB9074E09174E55BE3CA4941309A672" target="_blank">Copyright Agreement Form</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/F6FB8940C9B54CC08CDC740CCFC6B8F3" target="_blank">Title Page</a></div>

<div>Ensure that the following items are present:● Cover letter to the editor<ul><li>The category of the manuscript</li><li>Confirming that “the paper is not under consideration for publication in another journal”.</li><li>Including disclosure of any commercial or financial involvement.</li><li>Confirming that the statistical design of the research article is reviewed.</li><li>Confirming that last control for fluent English was done.</li><li>Confirming that journal policies detailed in Information for Authors have been reviewed.</li><li>Confirming that the references cited in the text and listed in the references section are in line with OSCOLA</li></ul>● <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/BD7F3551BBE543F7A0E7628427A827AE" target="_blank">Copyright Agreement Form</a>● Permission of previously published copyrighted material if used in the present manuscript● <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/D4FC914AF17F43D6A40E18412A5E6731" target="_blank">Title page</a><ul><li>The category of the manuscript</li><li>The title of the manuscript</li><li>All authors’ names and affiliations (institution, faculty/department, city, country), e-mail addresses</li><li>Corresponding author’s email address, full postal address, telephone and fax number</li><li>ORCIDs of all authors.</li></ul>● Main Manuscript Document<ul><li>The title of the manuscript</li><li>Abstract: 250-300 words</li><li>Extended Summary (600-1000 words) in English for the articles which are not in English </li><li>Key words: 5-15 words</li><li>Main article sections</li><li>Grant support (if exists)</li><li>Conflict of interest (if exists)</li><li>Acknowledgement (if exists)</li><li>References</li><li>All tables, illustrations (figures) (including title, description, footnotes)</li></ul>​</div>

Issue Type	Regular
Editor(s)	Ömer Ekmekçi, Ali Paslı
Cover (PDF)
Front Pages (PDF)

Istanbul Law Review

VOLUME 80, ISSUE 2, 2022

An Examination of the Liability for Compensation for the Breach of Choice of Court Agreements: In the Light of the German Federal Court Decision of 17.10.2019