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;

Alman Federal Mahkemesi’nin 17.10.2019 Tarihli Kararı Işığında Milletlerarası Yetki Anlaşmalarının İhlal  Edilmesinin Tazminat Sorumluluğu Doğurması Hakkında Bir İnceleme

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;

Anayasa Mahkemesi Toplu İş Sözleşmesi Özerkliğini Sınırlandırabilir mi?

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;

Anonim Şirkette Azınlığın Korunması: Kim İçin, Neden ve Nasıl Bir Koruma?

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.

Genetik Babanın Türk Soybağı Hukukundaki Yeri

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;

Medenî Yargıda Hükmün Tamamlanmasının Hükmün Kesinleşmesi  ve Cebrî İcrası Bakımından Etkisi

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;

Roma Hukukunda Kusursuz Sorumluluğun Kusur Sorumluluğuna  Dönüşüm Süreci ve Bu Dönüşümün Modern Hukuka Etkisi

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;

1921 Anayasasının Türkiye’nin Mali Hukuk Düzenine Yansımaları

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;

Cezalandırılmayan Önceki Hareketler

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;

Geçici Koruma ve Mülteci Yükünün Paylaşılmasındaki Normatif  Boşlukların Giderilmesiyle İlgili Öneriler

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;

İnsan Hayatını Tehdit Eden Salgınlarla Mücadelede Küresel Bir Araç  Olarak CITES

Ömer

Prof.

Prof. Dr.

Ayşe

Assoc. Prof. Dr.

Elif

Turkish Law has recently witnessed new developments in product liability law. With Code No. 7223 on Product Safety and Technical Regulations (ÜGTDK), which was published in the Official Gazette on March 12, 2020, and entered into force one year later, the regulatory gap regarding the liability of the manufacturer, which existed in Turkish Law for approximately six years, was eliminated. With the Code, European Union Council Directive 85/374/COD was tried to be integrated into national law. However, approximately one year after the Code entered into force, new developments regarding product liability law in the European Union came into the spotlight.There is no doubt that the current Product Liability Directive 85/374 in the European Union is a valuable tool for compensating individuals who have suffered personal injury or material damage due to defective products. However, with rapid advances in technology, particularly in artificial intelligence, autonomous devices, and the circular economy, the current directive may not be sufficient to address emerging challenges and adequately protect the interests of injured parties. The Proposal for a new Product Liability Directive was published on September 28, 2022, to overcome these issues. This proposal aims to modernise the existing directive and adapt it to the realities of the modern digital economy, technological innovations, and developments.The proposal addresses some key issues:First, it provides liability for products from the modern digital economy: Determining liability has become more complex with the increasing use of artificial intelligence and other technologies in the field of products. The proposal introduces provisions to clarify the liability of manufacturers when these technologies are involved in product defects.Second, it introduces liability for products that come from the circular economy: The circular economy promotes the recycling and reuse of products, which can also lead to complexity in determining liability for damages caused by defective products. The proposal could establish explicit guidelines for determining liability in such cases.In addition, it facilitates proof of damage: The proposal aims to simplify the process for injured parties to provide evidence of bodily or property damage caused by defective products. This could involve new approaches to gathering and presenting evidence, particularly as advancing technology can sometimes make it impossible for injured parties to provide evidence of product defects. The proposal seeks to support the injured party in such impossible situations and to enable them to compensate for&nbsp;their losses. However, these proof methods are also new to EU law but may not be entirely new.It also balances the interests of injured parties and manufacturers: A fair balance must be struck between the rights of injured parties and the responsibilities of manufacturers. The proposal arguably seeks to achieve this balance while promoting product safety and innovation.Finally, it protects damage to data: Damage to intangible goods is, as a principle, not recoverable under the product liability directive. However, the Directive introduces a major innovation in that it recognises that data damage is compensable under the product liability law. Therefore, the proposal demonstrates the EU’s commitment to updating and improving its product liability regulations to keep pace with technological developments and economic changes and to provide better protection for consumers and injured parties.This comprehensive research study delves into the proposed amendments introduced by the EU Product Liability Directive Proposal. It meticulously analyzes the potential impacts of these amendments on the Turkish legal framework, especially when compared to the Turkish Product Safety and Technical Regulations Law No. 7223. The aim is to explore a deeper understanding of how the proposed amendments could be integrated into Turkish law to strengthen product liability and protect consumers’ rights more effectively.&nbsp;

2022/0302 Sayılı Avrupa Birliği Yeni Ürün Sorumluluk Direktif Teklifinin Getirdikleri Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme

Caner

The provision of Article 407/1 of the Turkish Civil Code, which mandates that every adult who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of one year or longer, along with the related provisions of Articles 407/2 and 471 of the same Code, have been annulled by the Constitutional Court. To address the legal vacuum and potential uncertainties in practise arising from the delayed implementation of this annulment decision, the legislator has reorganised the relevant provisions. Because of these amendments, custodial sentences will continue to exist as a condition requiring guardianship, albeit under different conditions. In this context, the idea that every adult who begins to serve a custodial sentence of a minimum fixed term duration should be restrained has been rejected. With the new regulation, it is not possible to restrict an adult who is in a penal institution for the execution of a finalised prison sentence without his or her request for this reason. However, the manner in which Article 407/1 of the Turkish Civil Code is structured is open to discussion. This is because, in its current form, the provision is suitable for interpretation as the person may assert any of the requests for guardianship or appointment of a trustee and the judge is bound by this request. However, interpreting Article 407/1 of the Turkish Civil Code in this way is not an appropriate application in terms of the discretionary authority of the guardianship authority, which is also emphasised in the Constitutional Court’s decision. It is also unacceptable in terms of “public guardianship” carried out by guardianship offices consisting of guardianship authority and supervisory authority within the scope of Article 397/1 of the Turkish Civil Code. In any case, Article 487/1 of the Turkish Civil Code should be interpreted as an implicit addition to the reasons stipulated in Article 408 of the Turkish Civil Code and as giving the judge the discretionary power not to restrict the person. For persons who have been sentenced to a total of five years or more of finalised imprisonment, a restraining order may be issued ex officio if deemed necessary for the protection of their personality or assets. In fact, we are of the opinion that it is not appropriate to determine this situation, which raises the possibility of restriction of the person against their consent, only&nbsp;according to the duration of the custodial sentence and ultimately to leave it entirely to the discretion of the judge. In its new version, Article 407/3 of the Turkish Civil Code clearly regulates that guardianship authorities must listen to the individual before making a decision. This provision must be applied in both cases where a guardianship examination is made upon request or ex officio. According to the wording of the provision, it is obligatory for the guardianship authority to hear and listen to the person concerned. The guardianship of a person who is restricted due to their custodial sentence shall be terminated automatically upon the lawful termination of this sentence. If the total sentence of imprisonment during the execution process is less than five years, the guardianship over the person must be terminated upon the request of the person. If the total imprisonment is five years or more, the court, which will conduct an examination upon the request of the person, may decide to terminate the guardianship if the reason for the protection of personality or assets disappears. Nevertheless, the provision of Art. 471/2, b. 1 of the Turkish Civil Code (The Regulation) regarding the termination of guardianship in the presence of a total sentence of less than five years is open to discussion. This is because, in such a case, it may be concluded that the guardianship may not be terminated in line with the wording of the provision; in other words, the judge is given a discretionary power in this regard. However, this expression, which gives discretionary power to the judge, should be read together with the provisions of Article 407/1-2 of the Turkish Civil Code and should be specific to persons who have been sentenced to a total of five years or more; in other words, guardianship examination is carried out ex officio. In such cases, the judge has a right to decide whether the reason for protecting personality or assets has disappeared. However, this amendment to the provisions of Art. 407 and Art. 471 of the Turkish Civil Code, which was made as a result of the Constitutional Court’s annulment decision and which gives priority to the person’s request to be heard, should be considered a positive development in favour of fundamental rights and freedoms, despite its shortcomings and possible problems.

Vesayeti Gerektiren Hallerden Biri Olarak Özgürlüğü Bağlayıcı Ceza Hakkında 7499 Sayılı Kanun ile Yapılan Değişikliklerin Değerlendirilmesi

Cemile

Assist. Prof. Dr.

Dilşah

In Turkish inheritance law, heirs obtain the entire estate as a whole upon testator’s death. This classical understanding, which is rooted in Roman and Pandect law, is also acknowledged in the Turkish-Swiss legal system as well (Art 599 of the Turkish Civil Code; Art 560 of the Swiss Civil Code).When multiple heirs exist, they form a community of heirs. In this case, the heir jointly bears the rights and assets of the inheritance. For this reason, they must make a unanimous decision on all disposals of the probate property. They are also under joint and several liability for the debt of the estate. Joint ownership of the estate continues until division. However, joint and several liabilities for debts do not cease with the division of the property. As a rule, in order for the division or assumption of the debts of the estate among the heirs to be effective against creditors, the heirs must consent to an agreement between them (Art 681 of the Turkish Civil Code).&nbsp;Art. 655 of the Turkish Civil Code regulates this special provision. According to Art. 655, “The heir who inherits an estate property pledged for the debts of the deceased shall assume the debt secured by that property.” There is a dispute concerning whether this provision establishes an exception to Article 681. The debate centres on whether the consent of the creditor is required for the assumption of debt or whether a mere transfer of the property that is pledged to the heir is sufficient.The first requirement for the application of Art. 655 of the Turkish Civil Code is the establishment of a pledge on the deceased’s own property. The scope of the provision includes pledges concerning movable and immovable property. The second condition is that the pledge must be established for the deceased’s debt. Although a pledge is generally granted by the debtor of the receivable it secures, it may also be granted by another person to the debt of another person. If the deceased has established a pledge for the debt of a third party, Art. 655 shall not be applicable and the heir to whom the pledged property is assigned shall not have assumed the original debt. Under these circumstances, the heir only has to bear the risk that if the debt is not fulfilled, the property will be sold and the receivable will be collected. The last requirement for the application of the provision is that the pledged property is left to the heir. This is done through division of inheritance. The heirs may conclude a written sharing agreement (Art 676 of the Turkish Civil Code), or if they cannot agree, a partition lawsuit is filed (Art 642 of the Turkish Civil Code).When interpreting Article 655, Article 888 of the Turkish Civil Code should be taken into account where the pledge concerned an immovable property. Accordingly, in the event that the immovable property on which the mortgage is established is left to one or more of the heirs in the division of inheritance, the creditor must notify the land registry officer in writing that he reserves the right to apply to the other heirs&nbsp;within one year following the notification of this circumstance to him. Otherwise, the debt is assumed by the heirs to whom the property was left. Thus, other heirs are released from liability.&nbsp;The basic principles of inheritance law should be considered when assigning other pledged probate assets. For the protection of the creditors of the deceased, the legislator has provided a double guarantee by allowing recourse to both the estate of the deceased and heirs’ personal assets. The joint and several liabilities of the heirs against the creditors end upon the approval of the creditors to the agreements regarding the debt’s assumption by one of the heirs or upon the expiration of the 5-year period stipulated in the law. All of these regulations are primarily intended to protect the creditors of the deceased. There is a risk that the pledged creditor may be harmed by leaving the pledged probate property to an heir that is financially unstable. As a result, it should be accepted that the provision regulates only the internal relations of the heirs and cannot be asserted against creditors without their consent.

Tereke Borçlarından Sorumluluk Kapsamında Rehinli Tereke Malının Mirasçıya Bırakılması

Esra

The most characteristic feature of negotiable instruments is the unity of right and bill. As a result, right cannot be claimed separately from bills, and the debtor is only obliged to pay for the bill submission (TCC2 1 645). When a negotiable instrument is lost, it becomes either objectively difficult or impossible to claim the right within the bill. The annulment sanction can only be applied in the event of the loss of a negotiable instrument; therefore, it shall be accepted as limitedly applied method. An annulment decision gives a person who is a bill holder at the time of loss the opportunity to claim right without a bill or to request a new issued bill (TCC 651, 652). Thus, while the right holder is protected from the risk of not being able to obtain his/her right due to loss, the debtor is also protected from the risk of paying to an unentitled person.Annulment decisions have two effects, positive and negative. With its positive effect, it authorises decision holder to claim his rights against the debtor. However, its negative effect removes the diagnostic function of the lost bill. Since an annulment does not affect its function of transferring the right, third parties who have acquired the bill may obtain the right under the bill. Nevertheless, to place the right of third parties before the decision holder requires their acquisition in good faith (TCC 686/2, 792).When a bill, which was subjected to an annulment decision, is held by third parties, the debtor may be exposed to two separate claims for enforcement because one of them is the decision holder and the other is the bill holder. There are no regulations in law regarding how debtors should act in this case. Considering the problem in the context of the Procedural law, the content of an annulment decision should be respected unless proven otherwise, even if it is taken within an ex-part proceeding. In this case, neither the annulment decision nor the contrary of the decision was proven. Moreover, there is evidence supporting the maliciousness of the bill holder.Regarding the effects of an annulment decision; since the diagnostic function of a bill is removed by annulment, it is impossible to determine the right holder on a bill in accordance with the formal entitlement principles (TCC 686/1). Therefore, bill holders cannot take advantage of the entitlement presumption. However, contrary to this, it has been concluded in the present case that a regular endorsement chain is sufficient to accept the bill holder as the right holder.The holder of a bill, which has been removed from its owner in any way, is obliged to return it if he/she is malicious or has a gross fault in his/her acquisition (TCC 686/2, 778/1,a, 792). As a rule, the burden of proof of the maliciousness of a bill holder belongs to the decision holder. In the meantime, the criterion of ordinary life&nbsp;flow can be used, and the characteristics of the present event should be considered. According to some data in the present event (such as the fact that the check holder has not submitted the check to the court despite being aware of the annulment process, not notified the addresses of endorsers -except one- at the executive proceeding stage), accepting the bill holder in good faith is contrary to the ordinary life flow. In addition, a check holder who deliberately prevented the implementation of the return process regulated in law by not submitting the bill to the court should not be disadvantaged. Therefore, the bill holder should have been held liable to prove his good faith.&nbsp;When we consider the problem from the viewpoint of debtor; debtor shall be discharged if he or she pays to the decision holder in good faith (TTK 646/2, 710/3). The fact that debtors’ awareness of bills circulation does not change the result. However, if the debtor is aware of the annulment decision, he/she should avoid paying the bill holder. Since the decision holder benefits from the presumption created in his favour with TCC 652/1, the bill holder shall bear the negative effect of the annulment decision.The Supreme Court of Appeals has consistently held in its previous precedents that a debtor must not ignore the consequences of an annulment decision; otherwise, he or she cannot discharge. According to previous precedents, it is necessary to determine the right holder in a case between the bill holder and the holder of annulment decision, and the debtor can only be held liable to the person entitled in this case. On the contrary, in the present event subjected to this study, it has been accepted that the annulment decision will automatically become ineffective when the bill subjected to the annulment decision was procured by third parties; thus, the acquisition of the bill holder has been prioritised. However, a solution requires creating a balance between the interests of the holder of annulment decisions, the bill holder, and the debtor by considering the legal nature and effects of annulment decisions and the circulation purpose of negotiable instruments. Otherwise, debtors will unfairly be subjected to the negative consequences of bill annulment just because they have issued a bill and have no fault in the loss of the bill.&nbsp;

Yargıtay’ın İçtihat Değişikliği: Kıymetli Evrakın İptalinin Borçluyu Cezalandırıcı Etkisi (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu’nun 19-1636/319, 19.3.2019 Künyeli Kararı Üzerine)

Murat

Art. 33-35 of the SRR contain provisions on the establishment of ship mortgages. These provisions are “supplementary provisions” with respect to the provisions of Art. One thousand and fourteen et seq. of the TCC concerning the establishment of ship mortgages. Therefore, the provisions of Articles 33-35 of the SRR apply to matters that are not regulated under Articles 1014 et seq. of the TCC. Articles’s provisions 33-35 of the SRR shall apply to ships registered in the registry. Accordingly, if a mortgage is to be established on ships registered in the National Ship Registry and ships and yachts registered in the Turkish International Ship Registry, the provisions of Art. 33-35 of the SRR shall be applied together with Art. 1014 et seq. of the TCC. A ship mortgage may be established to secure a receivable that may arise in the future or that is conditional or contingent upon a negotiable instrument. However, as stated in Art. 35/1 of the SRR, ship mortgages cannot be established for receivables that are contingent on a mortgaged promissory note or revenue bond. It is possible to establish mortgages on more than one ship or share for the same receivable. In addition, ships need not be registered in the same registry. In the event that a mortgage is established on more than one ship or ship share for the same receivable, the procedures to be performed in the ship registry are regulated under Art. 34 of the SRR.In the case of shared ownership, each shareholder may establish a ship mortgage on his or her share. However, after a ship mortgage is established on one or more shares, the shareholders cannot establish a mortgage on the entire ship. In addition, if all shares of a ship belong to a single owner, it is not possible for the owner to establish a ship mortgage on separate shares in favour of separate persons. On the other hand, in the case of joint ownership, a ship mortgage can only be established on the whole ship with the approval of all shareholders. The contractual pledges of the ships registered in the registry are provided through ship mortgage only. Accordingly, a pledge cannot be established on an individually registered ship within the framework of the provisions of Law No. 6750 on Movable Pledge in Commercial Transactions (TITRK). However, within the scope of Article 5/2 c. 1 of the TITRK, if a movable pledge in commercial transactions is established on the entire commercial or tradesman enterprise or on a certain movable asset, the ship registered in the registry is also included in the scope of the pledge if there is a ship registered in the registry among the pledged movable assets.&nbsp;In order to establish a mortgage on a ship registered in the registry, a formal mortgage agreement must be concluded, the mortgage fee must be paid, and the mortgage must be registered in the ship registry. Under Art. 33/2 c. 1 of the SRR, the mortgage agreement must be provided for in writing and the signatures must be approved by a notary public or the ship registry directorate. In addition, the mortgage agreement may be executed in the form of a notarial deed, or the signatures in the&nbsp;written mortgage agreement prepared by the parties may be approved by the notary public. On the other hand, to establish a mortgage on a ship registered in the registry, a sum corresponding to 11.38 per 10,000 of the amount of the receivable subject to the mortgage must be paid as a fee. The last condition to be fulfilled to establish a mortgage on a ship registered in the registry is registration of the mortgage in the registry. For this purpose, the parties to the mortgage agreement or their authorised representatives must submit a registration request to the ship registry directorate. If the registration request petition is submitted to the registry office together with its annexes, the registry office personnel shall record the information specified in Article 1016 of the TCC in GESBIS and in the section of encumbrances of the ship in the registry book kept in a physical environment. Thus, a ship mortgage is registered and established in the registry.&nbsp;

Gemi Sicil Yönetmeliği’nin Gemi İpoteğinin Kurulmasına İlişkin Hükümlerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Mustafa

For the last few decades, copyright on intellectual and artistic works and related rights over performances, phonograms, cinematographic productions, and radiotelevision broadcasts have been subjected to violations very easily and on a large scale, especially with innovations in the field of digital technologies. Therefore, on the one hand, regulations are being made at the international level, such as the TRIPS and WIPO Internet Agreements, while on the other hand, many of the states in the world are making various legal regulations to combat more effectively the violations of the rights of rights holders over their intellectual products on a national scale.&nbsp;The basis of various changes and new regulations in the Turkish Copyright Code (TCC) in the year 1995 and thereafter is essentially the aim of combating more effectively the violations of rights on intellectual products increased by technological innovations. In fact, it is necessary to evaluate the amendments made in 1995 and after Article 68 of the TCC regarding the refutation of infringements of financial rights on copyrighted products.&nbsp;In this essay, the amended provisions of Article 68 of the TCC are examined. To put it briefly, in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 68; the right holder who is subject to infringement of any of the financial rights in the form of processing, reproduction, dissemination, representation, and communication to the public on the work and intellectual and artistic products that are the subject of related rights may request the application of the method of refutation of infringement by demanding three times (namely triple compensation) the usual price. Although it is not explicitly stated in this Article, natural and legal persons defined as holders of rights under Article 80 of the Law can also use the same powers. Accordingly, those who adapt, reproduce, disseminate reproduced copies, represent, or communicate to the public a work, performance, phonogram, or production without obtaining written permission from the rights owner, or transmitting any sign, sound, or image to the public, without the permission of the rights holders, shall not be entitled to the price they may claim in the event of a contract, or they may request a maximum of three times more than the current market price to be determined in accordance with the provisions of this Law. As can be seen, in a copyrighted work unauthorised use of any of the rights of adaptation, reproduction, dissemination, representation in public places and transmission to the public is sufficient to demand more than three times the usual price of the infringed product, namely treble damage.&nbsp;However, in the second and third paragraphs of Article 68 of the Law, other rights are granted to the right holder in addition to the demand for three times the price in cases where the right to reproduce the copyrighted product alone and the right to disseminate it are violated. Other refutation methods, other than the triple&nbsp;compensation request, can only be used in cases of infringement of the right to reproduce and distribute along with reproduction. For example, if the action of a perpetrator violates any of the rights of processing, dissemination, representation, or transmission to the public, the refutation methods defined in the Law specific to the right of reproduction are not applied. In fact, due to the nature of these refutation methods specific to the right to reproduction, it is not possible to apply them in cases of infringement of other financial rights related to copyrighted work. Likewise, since the right to reproduction or dissemination is the most violated in practise, the second and third paragraphs of Article 68 include reproduction and dissemination as the only financial rights that can be subject to refutation methods other than the request for more than three times the usual price of infringed work.In this context, if the copies reproduced without permission are not put up for sale, the right holder may request the destruction of the reproduced copies, films, moulds and similar tools used for reproduction, or that they be given to him for an appropriate price not exceeding the production cost price, or, in the case of a contract, three times more than the amount he may request. This does not eliminate the legal liability of the unauthorised reproducer. If copies reproduced without permission are put up for sale, the rightful owner may use one of the options in the second paragraph regarding the copies in the possession of the infringer. However, for the second and third paragraphs to be implemented by rights holders other than the owner of the work, written reproduction permission from the owner of the work in accordance with Article 52 of the TCC is required.Rights claims arising under Article 68 can only be used in cases of violation of financial rights. If the rights violated are of a moral nature or if moral rights are violated along with financial rights, it is not possible for the plaintiff to request a decision in accordance with the provisions of Article 68 in respect of moral rights. The request for a reconsideration of moral rights can only be made within the scope of Articles 66 and 67 of the TCC.Finally, with the amendments made after 1995, the demand for three times the usual price, the payment of appropriate compensation for pirated copies, or the exercise of the right to destroy both copies and reproduction means, which is granted to the right holder on intellectual products in Article 68, is not conditioned on the fault of the perpetrator. It is not necessary for the plaintiff, whose financial rights have been violated, to suffer any damage in order to make such claims. In order to file a lawsuit according to Article 68, it is sufficient that the act attributed to the perpetrator is contrary to the law, that is, an unlawful act. Assuming that the use of the rights recognised in the TCC without the permission of the right owner and without any other reason for compliance with the law violates the rights, to deter possible&nbsp;and future infringements, the right owner is requested to pay three times the price he would have requested if he had made a contract with the infringer or the market value of the right subject to violation. Although such legal claims do not comply with the basic principles of Turkish compensation law, such sanctions are considered punishments specific to private law.

Fikri Mahsuller Üzerindeki Mali Haklara Tecavüzün Ref’i Yöntemleri (FSEK 68) Üzerine Bir İnceleme

Onur

The majority rule is one of the fundamental principles governing the limited companies. This means that the decisions taken, and the management followed by the majority affect other stakeholders who may have different interests other than those of the majority shareholder. As any power, the powers vested in the majority shareholder of a public company (in Turkish case, anonim ortaklık – briefly AO) thanks to majority rule may be abused by such shareholder.&nbsp;&nbsp;Against an abusive majority, the position of shareholders of a privately held AO is rather challenging and their options limited, due to lack of a viable access to liquid markets for their shares. This paper focuses on abuse by majority and how to mitigate this issue in an independent and privately held public company with an examination of the Turkish public company law on the matter regulated under Turkish Commercial Code numbered 6102 (briefly TCC).TCC art 202 governs unlawful use of the control for group of companies (conglomerate/ konzern). However, general provisions of limited companies lack any articles that directly regulate the issue of potentially or materially abusive behaviours by a majority (in broader terms, controlling) shareholder. Furthermore, TCC art 202 cannot be directly applied to the independent companies. Yet, an independent AO, either publicly or privately held, may well be the arena for an abuse by majority similar to the cases governed by TCC art 202. Current protections provided by TCC seems to fail to prevent chronic/systematic cases of abuse by majority in an independent and privately held AO; in return judicial and/or legislative intervention may be required. But how?This article examines the EU legal landscape with Member States’ approaches and European Model Companies Act while comparing them to Turkish perspective for finding effective ways to mitigate abusive majority behaviour in an independent and privately held AO.In order to provide such a perspective and to understand where the Turkish law stands, the following topics are discussed: differing legal approaches concerning abuse by the majority, equal treatment of shareholders, and exit rights as an effective remedy to mitigate the abuse by the majority.The EU legislation does not contain a general provision on how to prevent abuse by majority. In Member States, two approaches prevailed without a harmonising EU legislation. One approach seeks both a damage to company and to minority (eg France), the other finds it sufficient just damage to the minority in order to classify the action as an abuse by majority. For the minority, proving that company’s interest is also violated is a rather difficult task and as a result hinders the sought minority protection in most of the cases. Therefore, a single-threshold approach which&nbsp;requires minorities to prove only the damage to their interests should be the approach upheld. In independent and privately held AO, the options for a locked in minority are limited and a further minority protection is required. Single-threshold approach helps providing the sorely needed protection in a more efficient and global way.According to ECJ’s Audiolux ruling, no immanent principle of equal treatment of shareholders exists under EU law and the EU legislation does not force Member States the implementation of a blanket equal treatment principle of shareholders. Certain Member States tend to provide one. EMCA also regulates the issue directly. This is also the case in Turkish law via TCC art 357. With a provision explicitly imposing the company organs to uphold the principle of equal treatment of shareholders in the same position, single-threshold approach seems to be the prevailing approach in Turkish public company law, and thus Turkish law is positioned to provide an effective protection for minorities in an independent and privately held AO.&nbsp;&nbsp;With the Directive (EU) 2019/2121 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 Amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132, for cross-border conversions, mergers, and divisions of limited liability companies, Member States are under the obligation to provide a right to dispose of their shares for an adequate cash compensation, ie an exit right, to the company’s members who voted against the resolutions concerning the related transactions in the general assembly. These provisions may be used by the minority to protect itself from abuses, potential ones included in the aforementioned transactions.&nbsp;EMCA provides a more comprehensive protection by regulating the liquidation due to fraud on the minority in Section 11.33, the right to sell out provided to minority stipulated in Section 11.35. Furthermore, according to Section 11.37, shareholders who incurred a loss have a right to be redeemed if the company, individual shareholders, the company’s creditors or other third parties incur a loss due to a shareholder’s intentional or grossly negligent action, and there exists a risk of continued abuse.&nbsp;Concerning the remedies to save the minority from the abuses committed by majority in independent and privately held AOs, a sell-out provision forcing the majority to buy the minority’s shares should also be introduced to TCC. In order to provide the minority with better options, and legal clarity and to protect it from judicial surprises, TCC art 531 on dissolution by just cause should also be modified in a way that it provides minority to directly request from the court to exit the company, if possible, at the majority’s expense. This type of mechanism would significantly ameliorate the minority’s position in companies, since the risk of paying the relevant cost would create a better incentive for majority to refrain from abusing its power. Furthermore, for the minorities, especially in an independent and privately held AO where they are deprived of an access to liquid markets, it would create the opportunity to be fairly compensated for their shares.&nbsp;

AB Hukuk Düzeni ve EMCA’da Anonim Ortaklıklarda Çoğunluğun Kötüye Kullanımının Etkilerinin Azaltılması: İzole ve Halka Kapalı Türk Anonim Ortaklıklarında Azınlığın Korunması İçin Esinlenmek Mümkün Mü?

Muhammet

In Turkish Penal Code No. 765, misdemeanours were defined as a type of offence. This Code classified offences into two categories: crimes and misdemeanours. However, with the introduction of Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, misdemeanours are no longer included as a type of offence. Removal of certain acts constituting a misdemeanour from the Penal Code require a separate code. Consequently, the Misdemeanours Code was adopted and came into force to create a system for acts requiring administrative sanctions, which are scattered throughout the legislation, and to ensure consistency in their implementation.With the enactment of the Misdemeanours Code, many problems and debates have arisen. First, these debate concerned whether some articles of the code conform to the constitution. Beyond constitutional debates, there are also discussions about how legal regulations should be applied and interpreted. There is no consensus on the nature of the Misdemeanours Code, primarily because it is closely related to both administrative and criminal law. Administrative sanction decisions against misdemeanours are considered “administrative actions”. There is no doubt about this matter. However, annulment procedures, which follow classical administrative procedures, cannot be applied to all administrative sanction decisions. Acts requiring administrative sanctions are broadly and uniformly regulated in the legislation. The Misdemeanours Code defines all acts requiring administrative sanctions as misdemeanours and establishes general provisions applicable to them.The Misdemeanours Code also provides specific legal remedies against decisions involving administrative fines and property transfer to the public. According to this regulation, judicial jurisdiction (criminal judge) generally serves as the judicial remedy, except where otherwise provided, against decisions involving administrative fines and property transfer to the public. Before the Misdemeanours Code came into force, the administrative judiciary was typically responsible for administrative sanction decisions. Previously, although a clear regulation in law was necessary for the judicial judiciary to be responsible for decisions involving administrative sanctions, the Misdemeanours Code now requires that this responsibility must be explicitly stated in law for the administrative judiciary.It has been argued that some provisions of the Misdemeanours Code are unconstitutional, leading to applications being made to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Türkiye for the annulment of these provisions. In particular, the constitutionality of provisions on legal remedies has been debated. The core of these debates is whether the administrative judiciary has a constitutional basis and whether its judicial power is constitutionally limited. Thus, there is a question of whether the legislator can, through legal regulation, assign the resolution of a&nbsp;dispute falling under the administrative judiciary’s jurisdiction to the judicial jurisdiction. The Constitutional Court annulled some articles of the Misdemeanours Code as unconstitutional, leading to their revision. Following the new regulations, an application for annulment was filed again, claiming unconstitutionality, but the Constitutional Court rejected the request for various reasons. The criteria used by the Constitutional Court were “public interest” and “justified reason.”&nbsp;The Misdemeanours Code refers to the Turkish Penal Code in many articles under its general provisions. However, the Turkish Penal Code or the Criminal Procedure Code does not serve as general laws in the context of the Misdemeanours Code. The Misdemeanours Code is a distinct piece of legislation with its own legal remedy system. It regulates “application” and “objection remedy” against decisions involving administrative fines or the transfer of property to the public due to an act constituting a misdemeanour. A debate has been held on whether an application can be made against decisions resulting from the objection remedy. The most significant debate in this context is whether the extraordinary legal remedies laid down in the Criminal Procedure Code can also be applied to misdemeanours. Although the doctrine contains different opinions, the Court of Cassation has issued varying decisions on this issue.

İdari Yaptırım Kararlarına Karşı Kabahatler Kanunu’nda Düzenlenen Kanun Yollarına İlişkin Bir İnceleme

The Ottoman Empire, within the constraints of its own circumstances, made reasonable efforts to modernize the profession of “legal representative for the case” (“dava vekilliği”) existing under the term “attorneyship for being party in the case/hearing” (“husumete/murafaaya vekalet”) in Islamic Law. In this regard, the Regulation on Legal Representatives for the Case of Regulatory (“Nizamiye”) Courts (“Mehakim-i Nizamiye Dava Vekilleri Hakkında Nizamname”) dated 1875, is the first regulatory framework related to the legal profession. It holds the status of being the foundational regulation for the profession of advocacy in the Turkish legal system.When the Turkish Republic era was reached, the prevailing view was that the legal institution of legal representative for the case was inadequate, and there was a need to create a new professional branch. In this context, within the ongoing judicial reform efforts, the aim was to establish a transitional period with Attorney’s Act numbered 460 (“Muhamat Kanunu”) until a more comprehensive law was enacted.Attorney’s Act consisted of a temporary total of 18 articles, led to the emergence of decisions in the post-war period with a predominant political aspect through the commissions (“tasfiye komisyonları/meclis-i tefrik”) established under this act as well as it facilitated the establishment of a new profession known as attorneyship (“muhamilik”), defined the rights, powers, and duties of this profession, specified the conditions for acceptance and transition into this profession, ensured the formation of a new professional organization under the name of the bar association, and introduced principles that still hold validity today such as activities incompatible with attorneyship or the prohibition of participation in a lawsuit.The consensus that has been present since the Ottoman period on the fundamental solutions outlined in the Attorney’s Act has led to debates in the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye focusing more on secondary issues. These issues include (i) the duration and form of the internship required to be eligible for the profession of attorneyship, (ii) whether graduation from a law school is a prerequisite for practicing as an attorney, and (iii) whether the terms “muhami” and “muhamat” deriving from the Arabic word “himaye”, “mahmi” and meaning that “protector”, are suitable for the newly established profession.&nbsp;In today’s context, the first two of these three discussed issues still retain their significance. Specifically, the 36-month internship system, originally envisaged as a civil servant within the judiciary and financed by the state according to the Attorney’s Act, has now transformed into a 12-month internship with an uncertain work structure, funded by the candidate themselves. When the current internship approach falls short of meeting the average characteristics of practices in other countries compared to the&nbsp;internship system outlined in the Attorney’s Act, it is observed that there has been a regression in terms of the duration and financial burden of the internship, limited progress regarding the choice of internship placements, and an ongoing expectation for the implementation of the bar exam. Therefore, it should be emphasized that a thorough review of the internship provisions in the regulations for lawyering would be highly beneficial.&nbsp;&nbsp;On the other hand, although it was not considered a reputable view during the Attorney’s Act discussions in the parliament, it is seen that two years after the Act’s enactment, graduates of the school of political sciences were allowed to practice as a lawyer by taking additional courses and completing exams. This practice continued for over 40 years. While investigating the rationale behind this, it is noted according to some approximate data that in the 1920s, only 20-30 people graduated from law faculties each year; considering that Ankara Law School produced its first graduates in 1928, a significant change in this number until the 1930s seems unlikely; in 1939, there were a total of 1,631 lawyers in Türkiye; from the 1960s to the late 1970s, the two law faculties in Türkiye produced a total of 950 graduates each year; in 1961- 1962, that the ratio of lawyers in Türkiye to the population was deemed sufficient pursuant to the research conducted by the State Planning Organization. Therefore, it can be inferred that the opportunity for political sciences graduates to practice law was provided until the gap in the legal professional workforce was filled; in other words, until the days when the ratio of lawyers to real persons in Türkiye decreased from one lawyer for every 10,000 individuals to one lawyer for every 2,485 individuals. However, today, by the ratio of lawyers to real persons, which is 459, in Türkiye, the question of whether graduates from other fields should practice law has evolved into the question of “Is there a need for so many legal professionals/lawyers?”&nbsp;

Cumhuriyet Dönemi’nde Modern Avukatlık Mesleğine Geçiş, TBMM Genel Kurul Görüşmeleri ve Günümüze Dair Eleştiriler

One of the common features of law and literature is world-building with names. Ursula le Guin’s She Unnames Them All can be read as a text that considers the ordermaking function of names and challenges masculine character of naming. She, the main character of story, detaches things from their names, in a way approaching the divine violence of Benjamin’s conceptualization. She purifies nature from culture and returns it to its original state. This move to undo the established order can be considered as an anarchist attitude. Because, in line with Benjamin’s description of divine violence, main character of story does not replace names with new ones, she just unnames them. In the story, the justification for this is that names are not useful to non-humans anyway, and that living things are a homogeneous unity when stripped of their names. It is implied that nature is good in itself. While the association of names with usefulness meets the categories of labor and work, which Arendt presents as human conditions, it excludes the category of action. By using names, humans make designs that will ensure their survival, but beyond that, names make it possible for humans to think universals such as justice and beauty and to act in accordance with these universals. In other words, language makes it possible not only to make means but also to assign ends. Thus, the abandonment of universals is not only the abandonment of the means of human survival, but also the abandonment of freedom as a political end and justice as a legal end. So, the detachment of names from action means the rejection of law, which can be characterized as political naming. On the other hand, another fictional character, Tom Bombadil from The Lord of the Rings, does not turn his back on names while maintaining the implication that nature is good in itself. Another Tolkien character, the elves, who, like Tom Bombadil, are good with names, not only build a world with names but also resist evil. They defend peace, plurality and heterogeneity in Middle-earth by taking into account the balance of power. In the Lord of the Rings universe, it is not naming that is evil, but rule through naming. There are three types of use of names in the Lord of The Rings universe. Natural names representing pure science like Bombadil’s, names that are the product of conscious design like the elves’, and misnomers of evil characters like Sauron and Saruman. Different uses of names correspond to different forms of the reason. Misnaming refers to the subject’s manipulation and destruction of the nature of the object for its own purposes. In this sense, misnaming corresponds to instrumental reason. The villains are characters who not only instrumentalize nature but also dominate the people. On the other hand, elves, or wizards like Gandalf, that is, those who give things a name that corresponds to their nature, are characters who do not destroy nature while making use of it, and who take care of nature like a gardener. In this context, the gardener is the symbol of the right ruler. The struggle against evil characters, those who want power for domination, is also a struggle against the substitution of means for ends. The symmetry of Ursula’s anarchist attitude in Tolkien&nbsp;is the maxim “power corrupts”. In this statement, which is the essence of the concept of checks and balances embodied in American constitutionalism, law is seen not as a form of domination but as an antidote to arbitrariness. It is no coincidence that gardener hobbit, a representative of the natural law principle of protecting harmony in nature, and his employer are assigned the task of destroying the ring of power. This is because these two are from the Shire, which offers an example of an unstratified society.

Adlandırma, düzen ve İktidar: Tolkien Yüzüklerin Efendisi & Ursula She Unnames Them All

@JOURNAL_BOX_CURRENT

@JOURNAL_BOX_EARLYVIEW

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.

Mahkeme Dışında Yapılan Sulh ve Yargılamaya Etkisi

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.

İşverenin Engelli İşçi Çalıştırma Yükümlülüğü

@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.

Gece Çalışması ve Gece Çalışma Süresinin Sınırı ile İlgili Değişikliklerin Değerlendirilmesi

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.

Arabuluculuk ve Tahkimi Bir Arada İçeren Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolu

@JOURNAL_BOX_MOSTREAD

İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi tarafından yayımlanmaktadır.
İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası’nda, hukuk ve/veya hukuk ile ilişki kuran bilimsel disiplinler alanlarında, özgün akademik çalışmalara yaslanan, teorik veyahut uygulamalı; toplum içindeki davranış ve ilişkilerin değerlendirilmesi, hukuk sistemleri, makale, karar incelemeleri, mevzuat tahlili-tahkiki, hukukî matbuatın değerlendirilmesini konu edinen (müspet-menfi) eleştirel metinler, tercümeler dolayısıyla ulusal ve uluslararası ölçeğe teşmil olabilecek çalışmalar yayımlanmaktadır.
Bu çerçevede Hukuk Fakültesi Mecmuası’nda; (i) Hukuk kuramını genişleten ve hukukî uygulamaların teorik zeminini besleyen; (ii) gerek akademik gerekse de bir erk olarak yargının usûllerini (metodoloji) tahlil ve gerektiğinde teşrih edici; (iii) özel ya da kamusal bağlamda topluma geniş çaplı etki eden hukuksal tefekkürün, fiillerin, süreçlerin, simgelerin vb. mevcudiyetini irdeleyen; (iv) başta hukukî olmak üzere ele alınan konuyu sosyolojik, siyasal, psikolojik, felsefî, ahlâkî, coğrafî, tarihsel yanlarıyla da tahlil edebilecek metinlere yer verilmektedir.

Derginin tüm giderleri İstanbul Üniversitesi tarafından karşılanmaktadır. Dergide makale yayını ve makale süreçlerinin yürütülmesi ücrete tabi değildir. Dergiye gönderilen ya da yayın için kabul edilen makaleler için işlemleme ücreti ya da gönderim ücreti alınmaz.

Fethi

Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI)

EBSCO

ERIH PLUS

TR Dizin

DOAJ

SOBIAD

@METRIC_VOLUMES

@METRIC_ISSUES

@METRIC_ARTICLES

@METRIC_OPENACCESS

İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası

@INFO_TAB_ABOUT

Editor in Chief

Co Editor in Chief

Editorial Assistant

Language Editor

Editor

@INFO_TAB_BOARDS

İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, yayın dili Türkçe, İngilizce olan; yılda dört defa yayınlanan, akademik ve hakemli bir dergidir.İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası‘nda, hukuk ve/veya hukuk ile ilişki kuran bilimsel disiplinler alanlarında, özgün akademik çalışmalara yaslanan, teorik veyahut uygulamalı; makale, karar incelemeleri, mevzuat tahlili-tahkiki, hukukî matbuatın değerlendirilmesini konu edinen (müspet-menfi) eleştirel metinler, tercümeler dolayısıyla ulusal ve uluslararası ölçeğe teşmil olabilecek çalışmalar yayımlanmaktadır.İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası’nda; (i) Hukuk kuramını genişleten ve hukukî uygulamaların teorik zeminini besleyen; (ii) gerek akademik gerekse bir erk olarak yargının usûllerini (metodoloji) tahlil ve gerektiğinde teşrih edici; (iii) özel ya da kamusal bağlamda topluma geniş çaplı etki eden hukuksal tefekkürün, fiillerin, süreçlerin, simgelerin vb. mevcudiyetini irdeleyen; (iv) başta hukukî olmak üzere ele alınan konuyu sosyolojik, siyasal, psikolojik, felsefî, ahlâkî, coğrafî, tarihsel yanlarıyla da tahlil edebilecek metinlere yer verilmektedir.Bu kapsamda özellikle şu konulara öncelik tanınmaktadır:• İnsan hakları hukuku,• Ceza hukuku,• Finans ve mali hukuk,• Medeni hukuk,• Ticaret hukuku,• Borçlar hukuku,• İcra ve iflâs hukuku

Amaç ve Kapsam

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

Dizinler

Dergi yayın etiğinde en yüksek standartlara bağlıdır ve <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, <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>, <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a> ve <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> tarafından yayınlanan etik yayıncılık ilkelerini benimser; Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing başlığı altında ifade edilen ilkeler için: <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> Gönderilen makaleler derginin amaç ve kapsamına uygun olmalıdır. Orijinal, yayınlanmamış ve başka bir dergide değerlendirme sürecinde olmayan, her bir yazar tarafından içeriği ve gönderimi onaylanmış yazılar değerlendirmeye kabul edilir. Makale yayınlanmak üzere Dergiye gönderildikten sonra yazarlardan hiçbirinin ismi, tüm yazarların yazılı izni olmadan yazar listesinden silinemez ve yeni bir isim yazar olarak eklenemez ve yazar sırası değiştirilemez.İntihal, duplikasyon, sahte yazarlık/inkar edilen yazarlık, araştrma/veri fabrikasyonu, makale dilimleme, dilimleyerek yayın, telif hakları ihlali ve çıkar çatışmasının gizlenmesi, etik dışı davranışlar olarak kabul edilir. Kabul edilen etik standartlara uygun olmayan tüm makaleler yayından çıkarılır. Buna yayından sonra tespit edilen olası kuraldışı, uygunsuzluklar içeren makaleler de dahildir.İntihal Ön kontrolden geçirilen makaleler, iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal/kendi kendine intihal tespit edilirse yazarlar bilgilendirilir. Editörler, gerekli olması halinde makaleyi değerlendirme ya da üretim sürecinin çeşitli aşamalarında intihal kontrolüne tabi tutabilirler. Yüksek benzerlik oranları, bir makalenin kabul edilmeden önce ve hatta kabul edildikten sonra reddedilmesine neden olabilir. Makalenin türüne bağlı olarak, bunun oranın %15 veya %20'den az olması beklenir.Çift Kör Hakemlikİntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir. Editör, makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakemlikten geçmesini sağlar ve makale biçimsel esaslara uygun ise, gelen yazıyı yurtiçinden ve /veya yurtdışından en az iki hakemin değerlendirmesine sunar, hakemler gerek gördüğü takdirde yazıda istenen değişiklikler yazarlar tarafından yapıldıktan sonra yayınlanmasına onay verir.

Politikalar

Dergi açık erişimlidir ve derginin tüm içeriği okura ya da okurun dahil olduğu kuruma ücretsiz olarak sunulur. Okurlar, ticari amaç haricinde, yayıncı ya da yazardan izin almadan dergi makalelerinin tam metnini okuyabilir, indirebilir, kopyalayabilir, arayabilir ve link sağlayabilir. Bu <a href="https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/translations/turkish-translation" target="_blank">BOAI</a> açık erişim tanımıyla uyumludur. Derginin açık erişimli makaleleri Creative Commons Atıf-GayrıTicari 4.0 Uluslararası (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.tr" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) olarak lisanslıdır.

Derginin tüm giderleri İstanbul Üniversitesi tarafından karşılanmaktadır. Dergide makale yayını ve makale süreçlerinin yürütülmesi ücrete tabi değildir. Dergiye gönderilen ya da yayın için kabul edilen makaleler için işlemleme ücreti ya da gönderim ücreti alınmaz.

Yazarlar dergide yayınlanan çalışmalarının telif hakkına sahiptirler ve çalışmaları  Creative Commons Atıf-GayrıTicari 4.0 Uluslararası (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.tr" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) olarak lisanslıdır. CC BY-NC 4.0 lisansı, eserin ticari kullanım dışında her boyut ve formatta paylaşılmasına, kopyalanmasına, çoğaltılmasına ve orijinal esere uygun şekilde atıfta bulunmak kaydıyla yeniden düzenleme, dönüştürme ve eserin üzerine inşa etme dâhil adapte edilmesine izin verir.

Editörler, yayınlanan makalede, bulguları, yorumları ve sonuçları etkilemeyen küçük hatalar tespit edilirse düzeltme yayınlamayı düşünebilirler. Editörler, bulguları ve sonuçları geçersiz kılan büyük hatalar / ihlaller söz konusu olduğunda, makaleyi geri çekmeyi düşünmelidir. Yazarlar tarafından araştırma veya yayını kötüye kullanmaya yönelik olasılık söz konusu ise; bulguların güvenilir olmadığına ve yazarların kurumlarının olayı soruşturmadığına dair kanıtlar var veya olası soruşturma haksız veya sonuçsuz görünüyor ise, editörler endişe ifadesi yayınlamayı düşünmelidir. Düzeltme, geri çekme veya endişe ifadesi ile ilgili olarak <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english" target="_blank">COPE</a> ve <a href="https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/" target="_blank">ICJME</a> yönergeleri dikkate alınır.

Dergide yayınlanan tüm yazıların korunmasını ve kalıcı olarak erişilebilir olmasını sağlamak için makaleler, ulusal bir arşiv sitesi olarak hizmet veren ve aynı zamanda LOCKSS'in içeriği toplamasına, korumasına ve sunmasına izin veren Dergipark'ta saklanmaktadır.Ek olarak, yazarların kendilerinin makalelerinin son PDF sürümünü Open Archives Initiative (<a href="https://www.openarchives.org/" target="_blank">https://www.openarchives.org/</a>) standartlarına uygun açık elektronik arşivlerde arşivlemeleri önerilir. Yazarlar, yayınladıkları arşiv versiyonundan, İ.Ü. Yayınevinin dergi web sitesinin URL'sine bağlantı sağlamalıdır.

İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, yayın etiğinde en yüksek standartlara bağlıdır ve <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, <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>, <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a> ve <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> tarafından yayınlanan etik yayıncılık ilkelerini benimser; Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing başlığı altında ifade edilen ilkeler için adres: <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>Gönderilen tüm makaleler orijinal, yayınlanmamış ve başka bir dergide değerlendirme sürecinde olmamalıdır. Her bir makale editörlerden biri ve en az iki hakem tarafından çift kör değerlendirmeden geçirilir. İntihal, duplikasyon, sahte yazarlık/inkar edilen yazarlık, araştrma/veri fabrikasyonu, makale dilimleme, dilimleyerek yayın, telif hakları ihlali ve çıkar çatışmasının gizlenmesi, etik dışı davranışlar olarak kabul edilir.Kabul edilen etik standartlara uygun olmayan tüm makaleler yayından çıkarılır. Buna yayından sonra tespit edilen olası kuraldışı, uygunsuzluklar içeren makaleler de dahildir.

Etik

Dergi araştırma etiğinde en yüksek standartları gözetir ve aşağıda tanımlanan uluslararası araştırma etiği ilkelerini benimser. Makalelerin etik kurallara uygunluğu yazarların sorumluluğundadır.-    Araştırmanın tasarlanması, tasarımın gözden geçirilmesi ve araştırmanın yürütülmesinde, bütünlük, kalite ve şeffaflık ilkeleri sağlanmalıdır.-    Araştırma ekibi ve katılımcılar, araştırmanın amacı, yöntemleri ve öngörülen olası kullanımları; araştırmaya katılımın gerektirdikleri ve varsa riskleri hakkında tam olarak bilgilendirilmelidir.-    Araştırma katılımcılarının sağladığı bilgilerin gizliliği ve yanıt verenlerin gizliliği sağlanmalıdır. Araştırma katılımcıların özerkliğini ve saygınlığını koruyacak şekilde tasarlanmalıdır.-    Araştırma katılımcıları gönüllü olarak araştırmada yer almalı, herhangi bir zorlama altında olmamalıdırlar.-    Katılımcıların zarar görmesinden kaçınılmalıdır. Araştırma, katılımcıları riske sokmayacak şekilde planlanmalıdır.-    Araştırma bağımsızlığıyla ilgili açık ve net olunmalı; çıkar çatışması varsa belirtilmelidir.-    Deneysel çalışmalarda, araştırmaya katılmaya karar veren katılımcıların yazılı bilgilendirilmiş onayı alınmalıdır. Çocukların ve vesayet altındakilerin veya tasdiklenmiş akıl hastalığı bulunanların yasal vasisinin onayı alınmalıdır.-    Çalışma herhangi bir kurum ya da kuruluşta gerçekleştirilecekse bu kurum ya da kuruluştan çalışma yapılacağına dair onay alınmalıdır.-    İnsan öğesi bulunan çalışmalarda, “yöntem” bölümünde katılımcılardan “bilgilendirilmiş onam” alındığının ve çalışmanın yapıldığı kurumdan etik kurul onayı alındığı belirtilmesi gerekir.

Makalelerin bilimsel ve etik kurallara uygunluğu yazarların sorumluluğundadır. Yazar makalenin orijinal olduğu, daha önce başka bir yerde yayınlanmadığı ve başka bir yerde, başka bir dilde yayınlanmak üzere değerlendirmede olmadığı konusunda teminat sağlamalıdır. Uygulamadaki telif kanunları ve anlaşmaları gözetilmelidir. Telife bağlı materyaller (örneğin tablolar, şekiller veya büyük alıntılar) gerekli izin ve teşekkürle kullanılmalıdır. Başka yazarların, katkıda bulunanların çalışmaları ya da yararlanılan kaynaklar uygun biçimde kullanılmalı ve referanslarda belirtilmelidir.Gönderilen makalede tüm yazarların akademik ve bilimsel olarak doğrudan katkısı olmalıdır, bu bağlamda “yazar” yayınlanan bir araştırmanın kavramsallaştırılmasına ve dizaynına, verilerin elde edilmesine, analizine ya da yorumlanmasına belirgin katkı yapan, yazının yazılması ya da bunun içerik açısından eleştirel biçimde gözden geçirilmesinde görev yapan birisi olarak görülür. Yazar olabilmenin diğer koşulları ise, makaledeki çalışmayı planlamak veya icra etmek ve / veya revize etmektir. Fon sağlanması, veri toplanması ya da araştırma grubunun genel süpervizyonu tek başına yazarlık hakkı kazandırmaz. Yazar olarak gösterilen tüm bireyler sayılan tüm ölçütleri karşılamalıdır ve yukarıdaki ölçütleri karşılayan her birey yazar olarak gösterilebilir. Yazarların isim sıralaması ortak verilen bir karar olmalıdır. Tüm yazarlar yazar sıralamasını <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/E53FB0CE54514A729F14BBA673C58319" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu'nda</a> imzalı olarak belirtmek zorundadırlar.Yazarlık için yeterli ölçütleri karşılamayan ancak çalışmaya katkısı olan tüm bireyler “teşekkür / bilgiler” kısmında sıralanmalıdır. Bunlara örnek olarak ise sadece teknik destek sağlayan, yazıma yardımcı olan ya da sadece genel bir destek sağlayan, finansal ve materyal desteği sunan kişiler verilebilir.Bütün yazarlar, araştırmanın sonuçlarını ya da bilimsel değerlendirmeyi etkileyebilme potansiyeli olan finansal ilişkiler, çıkar çatışması ve çıkar rekabetini beyan etmelidirler. Bir yazar kendi yayınlanmış yazısında belirgin bir hata ya da yanlışlık tespit ederse, bu yanlışlıklara ilişkin düzeltme ya da geri çekme için editör ile hemen temasa geçme ve işbirliği yapma sorumluluğunu taşır.

Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, cinsel yöneliminden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirir. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar. Gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalacağını garanti eder. Baş editör içerik ve yayının toplam kalitesinden sorumludur. Gereğinde hata sayfası yayınlamalı ya da düzeltme yapmalıdır.Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve Dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemlerin araştırmayla ilgili, yazarlarla ve/veya araştırmanın finansal destekçileriyle çıkar çatışmaları olmamalıdır. Değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda tarafsız bir yargıya varmalıdırlar. Gönderilmiş yazılara ilişkin tüm bilginin gizli tutulmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir. Bazı durumlarda editörün kararıyla, ilgili hakemlerin makaleye ait yorumları aynı makaleyi yorumlayan diğer hakemlere gönderilerek hakemlerin bu süreçte aydınlatılması sağlanabilir.

Daha önce yayınlanmamış ya da yayınlanmak üzere başka bir dergide halen değerlendirmede olmayan ve her bir yazar tarafından onaylanan makaleler değerlendirilmek üzere kabul edilir. Gönderilen ve ön kontrolü geçen makaleler iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir.Seçilen makaleler en az iki ulusal/uluslararası hakeme çift taraflı kör hakemlik ile değerlendirmeye gönderilir; yayın kararı, hakemlerin talepleri doğrultusunda yazarların gerçekleştirdiği düzenlemelerin ve hakem sürecinin sonrasında baş editör tarafından verilir.

Hakemlik Hakkında

Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, cinsel yöneliminden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirir. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar. Gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalacağını garanti eder. Baş editör içerik ve yayının toplam kalitesinden sorumludur. Gereğinde hata sayfası yayınlamalı ya da düzeltme yapmalıdır.Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve Dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemlerin araştırmayla ilgili, yazarlarla ve/veya araştırmanın finansal destekçileriyle çıkar çatışmaları olmamalıdır. Değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda tarafsız bir yargıya varmalıdırlar. Gönderilmiş yazılara ilişkin tüm bilginin gizli tutulmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir. Bazı durumlarda editörün kararıyla, ilgili hakemlerin makaleye ait yorumları aynı makaleyi yorumlayan diğer hakemlere gönderilerek hakemlerin bu süreçte aydınlatılması sağlanabilir.

Daha önce yayınlanmamış ya da yayınlanmak üzere başka bir dergide halen değerlendirmede olmayan ve her bir yazar tarafından onaylanan makaleler değerlendirilmek üzere kabul edilir. Gönderilen ve ön kontrolü geçen makaleler iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir.Baş Editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirir. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar.Seçilen makaleler en az iki ulusal/uluslararası hakeme değerlendirmeye gönderilir; yayın kararı, hakemlerin talepleri doğrultusunda yazarların gerçekleştirdiği düzenlemelerin ve hakem sürecinin sonrasında baş editör tarafından verilir.Hakemlerin değerlendirmeleri objektif olmalıdır. Hakem süreci sırasında hakemlerin aşağıdaki hususları dikkate alarak değerlendirmelerini yapmaları beklenir.-Makale yeni ve önemli bir bilgi içeriyor mu?-Öz, makalenin içeriğini net ve düzgün bir şekilde tanımlıyor mu?-Yöntem bütünlüklü ve anlaşılır şekilde tanımlanmış mı?-Yapılan yorum ve varılan sonuçlar bulgularla kanıtlanıyor mu?-Alandaki diğer çalışmalara yeterli referans verilmiş mi?-Dil kalitesi yeterli mi?Hakemler, gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir.

<ol><li>İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, ESCI ve ULAKBİM tarafından taranan “Hakemli Dergi” statüsünde yılda dört sayı (Mart, Haziran, Eylül, Aralık) olarak yayımlanır.</li><li>Mecmua’ya gönderilen yazılar, başka bir yerde yayımlanmamış ve yayımlanmak üzere gönderilmemiş olmalıdır. Bu hususta yazarlardan ayrıca taahhütname talep edilecektir.</li><li>Editörler Kurulu tarafından ilk değerlendirilmesi yapılan ve işbu yayın ilkelerine uygun olmadığı saptanan yazılar, hakeme gönderilmeden önce, buradaki kurallar doğrultusunda düzeltilmesi için yazara iade edilir. Yazım yanlışlarının olağanın dışında bulunması, incelenen konu bakımından gerekli olan yerli ve yabancı kaynakların tüketilmemiş olması, bilimsel ölçütlere ve akademik etik prensiplere uyulmaması, makale konusunun teori ve/veya uygulama açısından güncel bir değerinin/öneminin bulunmaması, yazının Editörler Kurulu tarafından reddi için yeterlidir.</li><li>Yazı, hakemlere gönderilmeden önce özel bilgisayar programları yardımı ile intihal incelemesine tabi tutulur. İlgili yazılım raporunun editöryel incelemesi kapsamında, dijital benzerlik oranının % 20’nin üzerinde çıkması, yazının reddi için yeterlidir.</li><li>Mecmua’da yayımlanacak makalenin, en üstün akademik standartlara uygun şekilde kaleme alınmış olması esastır. Bu çerçevede yazarlardan/yazılardan doktora/doçentlik tezi seviyesinde bir entelektüel çaba ve katkı beklenir.</li><li>İlk değerlendirmede uygun bulunan yazılar, yazar adları metinden çıkarılarak hakemlere gönderilir. Yazarlara yazının hangi hakemlere gönderildiği ile ilgili bilgi verilmez. Hakemlerden gelen raporlar doğrultusunda yazının yayımlanmasına, düzeltilmesine ya da geri çevrilmesine karar verilir. Hakem aşamasının asgari ve/veya azami bir süresi yoktur. Bu konunun takibi, münhasıran Editörler Kurulu’na ait bir görev ve yetki olup, yazı sahiplerinin doğrudan veya dolaylı şekilde bu aşamaya müdahale etmeleri etik ihlal sayılır.</li><li>Hakem raporlarının sonucunda yazının/eserin nihai olarak yayımlanıp yayımlanmayacağı ve yayımlanacaksa yazının Mecmua’nın hangi sayısında yer alacağı hususunda nihai takdir yetkisi ve sorumluluğu, Editörler Kurulu’na aittir. Tek bir olumsuz hakem raporunun varlığı, makalenin yayımlanmaması için yeterlidir.</li><li>Hakem aşamasının tamamlanmış olması, yazarlara makalenin yayımlanacağını gösterir özel/resmi bir belge talep etme yetkisi vermez. Yazarlar, bu konunun bilincinde ve sorumluluğunda olarak makalelerinin Mecmua’da yayımlanması ve hakem incelemesine tâbi tutulması başvurusunda bulunmaktadırlar. </li><li>Yazarlar; unvanlarını, görev yaptıkları kurumları, iletişim adresleri ile telefonlarını ve e-posta adreslerini bildirmelidirler.</li><li>Mecmua’nın yazı dili Türkçe ve İngilizcedir. Makalelerde 250 kelimeden oluşan Türkçe öz ve İngilizce abstract bölümlerine yer verilmeli ve en az 5 en çok 15 anahtar kelimenin de Türkçe ve İngilizce olarak yazıya eklenmesi gerekmektedir. Özetleri takiben Türkçe ve İngilizce dilindeki tüm makaleler için ayrıca 600-800 kelimelik İngilizce genişletilmiş özet yer almalıdır. Yayım başvurusuna konu edilen makalenin -dipnotlar dâhil olmak üzere- en fazla 20.000 kelimeden oluşması gerekir. Asgari bir kelime sınırı yoktur.</li><li>Makale metni, Times New Roman yazı tipinde, 1,5 satır aralığı ve 12 punto, dipnotları ise, tek satır aralığı ve 10 punto olarak hazırlanmalıdır. Dipnotları sayfa altında gösterilir. Atıflar OSCOLA atıf sistemi esas alınarak yapılmalıdır. Aksi takdirde makale hakem ataması yapılmaksızın yazara düzeltmeleri yapması için geri gönderilir. Türkçe makalelerdeki kısaltmalar ve diğer hususların ilan edilen yazım kuralları uyarınca yapılması gerekmektedir. Söz konusu atıf kurallarına https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ihm adresi üzerinden ulaşılabilir.</li><li>Yazar isimleri Türkçe ve İngilizce konu başlığının altında ve sağ tarafında yer almalı ve soyadının bitiminde yıldız konulmalıdır. Yıldızlı dipnotta yazarın unvanı, çalıştığı kurum, alanı ve e-posta adresi bildirilmelidir.</li><li>Makalenin sonunda, makalede kullanılan kaynakların, yazarların soyadlarına göre sıralandığı bir kaynakça bulunmalıdır.</li><li>Fakülte tarafından yayımlanan nüshalarla sınırlı kalmak üzere; yayına kabul edilen makalenin Fikir ve Sanat Eserleri Kanunu ve ilgili mevzuat çerçevesinde çoğaltma, yayma, umuma iletim, işleme ve çeviri konusundaki mali hakları, basılı, görsel, işitsel, sayısal/dijital vb. ortamlarda yurt içinde ve yurt dışında kullanılmak üzere Fakülte’ye devredilmiştir. Telif ücreti ödenmeyeceği yazarlar tarafından kabul edilmiştir.</li><li>Mecmua’da, makalelerin yanı sıra çeviri de yayımlanabilir. Bu nitelikteki yazılar Editörler Kurulu tarafından kabul edilebilir veya geri çevrilebilir. Çeviri metni ile birlikte asıl metin ve hak sahiplerinin (asıl eser sahibi ve yayınevinin) muvafakati de iletilmelidir. Çeviriler de hakem değerlendirilmesine tâbi tutulur.</li><li>İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası’nda yayımlanması istenen yazıların iuhfdergiler@istanbul.edu.tr e-posta adresine Microsoft Word yazılımı formatında (*.doc, *.docx) ve işbu yayın kurallarına uygun şekilde gönderilmesi gerekmektedir.</li><li>Bir başvurucunun aynı yayın yılı içerisinde (4 sayılık süreçte) sadece bir makalesi hakem incelemesine konu edilebilir.</li><li>Editörler Kurulu, derginin bir sayısında yer alacak makaleleri, Özel Hukuk – Kamu Hukuku dengesini koruma amacı, makalenin Mecmua’ya gönderilme ve hakem aşamasının tamamlanma tarihleri, makale konusun güncelliği, yazarların İstanbul Üniversitesi mensubu olup olmaması noktasındaki oransal denge gibi kriterleri gözeterek belirler.</li><li>Editörler Kurulu, tüm sayıların mümkün olduğunca eşit sayıda makale ile çıkması noktasında azami gayreti gösterir. Bir sayının çıkma tarihi itibarıyla, mizanpaj aşaması da dahil olmak üzere, yayım için gerekli tüm aşamaları tamamlamış olan bir makale, makale sayısı itibarıyla ilgili sayıda yayımlanamaz ise, ancak bu şartla, ilgili sayıdan belli bir süre sonra Online-First adı verilen sistem çerçevesinde bir sonraki sayı çıkmadan önce dijital olarak yayımlanır.</li></ol>

Yazım Kuralları

Makale başvuruları doğrudan <a href="mailto:iuhfdergiler@istanbul.edu.tr" target="_blank">iuhfdergiler@istanbul.edu.tr</a> adresine yapılmaktadır.

Derleme yazıları, okuyucular için bir konudaki kaynaklara ulaşmayı kolaylaştıran bir araç olsa da, her zaman orijinal çalışmayı doğru olarak yansıtmaz. Bu yüzden mümkün olduğunca yazarlar orijinal çalışmaları kaynak göstermelidir. Öte yandan, bir konuda çok fazla sayıda orijinal çalışmanın kaynak gösterilmesi yer israfına neden olabilir. Birkaç anahtar orijinal çalışmanın kaynak gösterilmesi genelde uzun listelerle aynı işi görür. Ayrıca günümüzde kaynaklar elektronik versiyonlara eklenebilmekte ve okuyucular elektronik literatür taramalarıyla yayınlara kolaylıkla ulaşabilmektedir.Kabul edilmiş ancak henüz sayıya dahil edilmemiş makaleler Early View olarak yayınlanır ve bu makalelere atıflar “forthcoming” şeklinde verilmelidir. Genel bir kaynaktan elde edilemeyecek temel bir konu olmadıkça “kişisel iletişimlere” atıfta bulunulmamalıdır. Eğer atıfta bulunulursa parantez içinde iletişim kurulan kişinin adı ve iletişimin tarihi belirtilmelidir. Bilimsel makaleler için yazarlar bu kaynaktan yazılı izin ve iletişimin doğruluğunu gösterir belge almalıdır. Kaynakların doğruluğundan yazar(lar) sorumludur. Tüm kaynaklar metinde belirtilmelidir. Kaynaklar alfabetik olarak sıralanmalıdır.Referans Stilli ve Formatıİstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, makalelerinde referans sistemi olarak OSCOLA kullanımını benimser. OSCOLA (Oxford Standard for the Citation of Legal Authorities), Oxford Üniversitesi tarafından yayınlanmış bir sistemdir. Ayrıntılı bilgi ve örnekler için:<a href="https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/research-subject-groups/publications/oscola" target="_blank">https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/research-subject-groups/publications/oscola</a>OSCOLA Referans Stili ÖrnekleriGenel HususlarKısaltmalarda nokta kullanmayınız. Bir dipnotta birden fazla esere atıf yapılıyorsa her bir eseri noktalı virgül ile ayırınız.Atıflarda supra, infra, ante, id, loc cit, op cit, contra kısaltmaları kullanılmayacaktır.İçindekiler kısmına yer verilmeyecektir.Kısaltmalar cetveline yer verilmeyecektir.Öz / AbstractMakalelerde 250 kelimeden oluşan Türkçe öz ve İngilizce abstract bölümlerine yer verilmelidir.Anahtar Kelimeler / KeywordsÖz bölümünün altında Türkçe en az 5 en çok 15 anahtar kelime kullanılmalıdır.Abstract bölümünün altında İngilizce en az 5 en çok 15 keywords kullanılmalıdır.Extended SummaryMakalelerde, makaleye yabancı yazarlar tarafından atıf yapılmasını sağlayacak ölçüde, makalede yer verilen bilgi ve görüşlerin derlendiği en az 600 en fazla 1000 kelimeden oluşacak İngilizce bir extended summary yer almalıdır.Mevzuata Yapılacak AtıfTürk mevzuatına atıf, aşağıda gösterildiği şekilde yapılmalıdır:•    Nüfus Hizmetleri Kanunu, Kanun Numarası: 5490, Kabul Tarihi: 25.4.2006, RG 29.4.2006/26153Yabancı devlet mevzuatına ve AB mevzuatına yapılacak atıflarda OSCOLA’nın 2.4, 2.6.1 ve 2.8.2 numaralı bölümlerinde gösterildiği şekilde atıf yapılmalıdır.KitaplarDipnotlarda öncelikle yazarın adı/soyadı atıfta bulunulan eserde yer aldığı şekilde yazılmalıdır. Dipnotlarda önce yazarın adı verilmeli, bunu bir virgül takip etmeli ardından kitap ismi italik olarak verilmelidir.Birbirini takip eden birden fazla sayfaya yapılan atıflarda ff kısaltması kullanılır.Ad Soyad, Kitap Adı (Kaçıncı Bası Olduğu, Yayınevi Yılı) Atıf Yapılan Sayfa.Makalenin yazım dili Türkçe iseTek yazarlı kitaplarda:•    3B Bahadır Erdem, Türk Vatandaşlık Hukuku (6. Bası, Beta 2017) 165.Çok yazarlı kitaplarda:•    Aysel Çelikel ve Günseli Öztekin Gelgel, Yabancılar Hukuku (24. Bası, Beta 2019) 86 vd.•    Cemal Şanlı, Emre Esen ve İnci Ataman-Figanmeşe, Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk (6. Bası, Beta 2018) 322.Editörlü Kitaplarda:Ad Soyad, ‘Eser (Bölüm) Adı’ iç Editör(ler) Adı (ed / birden çok editör olması halinde edr), Kitap Adı (Yayınevi Yıl) Atıf Yapılan Sayfa.•    Rumeysa Partalcı, ‘Türkiye’nin Çocuk Haklarına Dair Sözleşme’ye Koyduğu Çekincelerin İncelenmesi’ iç Günseli Öztekin Gelgel ve Faruk Kerem Giray (edr), Milletlerarası Aile ve Çocuk Hukukuna İlişkin Seçilmiş Makaleler (Beta 2017) 5.Makalenin yazım dili İngilizce iseTek Yazarlı kitaplarda:•    3B Bahadır Erdem, Türk Vatandaşlık Hukuku (6th, Beta 2017) 165.Çok yazarlı kitaplarda:•    Aysel Çelikel and Günseli Öztekin Gelgel, Yabancılar Hukuku (24th edn, Beta 2019) 86 ff.•    Cemal Şanlı, Emre Esen and İnci Ataman-Figanmeşe, Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk (6th edn, Beta 2018) 322.Editörlü KitaplarAd Soyad, ‘Eser (Bölüm) Adı’ in Editör(ler) Adı (ed / birden çok editör olması halinde eds), Kitap Adı (Yayınevi Yıl) Atıf Yapılan Sayfa.•    Rumeysa Partalcı, ‘Türkiye’nin Çocuk Haklarına Dair Sözleşme’ye Koyduğu Çekincelerin İncelenmesi’ in Günseli Öztekin Gelgel ve Faruk Kerem Giray (eds), Milletlerarası Aile ve Çocuk Hukukuna İlişkin Seçilmiş Makaleler (Beta 2017) 5.MakalelerAd Soyad, ‘Makale Adı’ (Yıl) Cilt (Sayı) Dergi Adı İlk Sayfa Numarası, Atıf Yapılan Sayfa•    Sevin Toluner, ‘Kıbrıs’ın Avrupa Birliği’ne Üyelik Başvurusunun Hukuki Geçerliliği ve Sonuçları’ (2002) 22(2) MHB (Prof. Dr. Ergin Nomer’e Armağan) 857, 860.•    Ayşe Nur Tütüncü, ‘Montreux Convention and Canal Istanbul’ (2017) 37(1) MHB 113, 116.Elektronik KaynaklarMakalenin yazım dili Türkçe iseYazar Adı Soyadı, ‘Eser Adı’ (Yıl) Cilt(Sayı) Dergi Adı Erişim Tarihi.•    Graham Greenleaf, ‘The Global Development of Free Access to Legal Information’ (2010) 1(1) EJLT &lt; http://ejlt.org//article/view/17 &gt; Erişim Tarihi 27 July 2010.Makalenin yazım dili İngilizce ise•    Graham Greenleaf, ‘The Global Development of Free Access to Legal Information’ (2010) 1(1) EJLT &lt; http://ejlt.org//article/view/17 &gt; Date of Access 27 July 2010.Web Siteleri ve BloglarMakalenin yazım dili Türkçe iseSarah Cole, ‘Virtual Friend Fires Employee’ (Naked Law, 1 May 2009) Erişim Tarihi 19 November 2009Makalenin yazım dili İngilizce iseSarah Cole, ‘Virtual Friend Fires Employee’ (Naked Law, 1 May 2009) Date of Access 19 November 2009Aynı Yazarın Birden Fazla Eserine AtıfAynı yazarın birden fazla eserine yapılacak atıflarda eser adları uygun şekilde kısaltılmalıdır:•  15 Erdem, Vatandaşlık Hukuku (n 3) 142.    23Erdem, ‘Cinsiyet Farkı’ (n 9) 297.Aynı Esere Birden Fazla Atıf YapılmasıAynı esere birden fazla atıf yapılması halinde:Makalenin yazım dili Türkçe ise1 Aysel Çelikel ve Günseli Öztekin Gelgel, Yabancılar Hukuku (24. Bası, Beta 2019) 86.…26 Çelikel ve Öztekin Gelgel (n 1) 112.27 ibid 114-115.Makalenin yazım dili İngilizce ise1 Aysel Çelikel and Günseli Öztekin Gelgel, Yabancılar Hukuku (24th edn, Beta 2019) 86.…26 Çelikel and Öztekin Gelgel (n 1) 112.27 ibid 114-115.Yargı Kararları - DavalarTürk mahkeme kararlarına aşağıda yer alan örneklerde gösterildiği şekilde atıf yapılmalıdır:Ankara 3 Sulh Mahkemesi, 4558/3543, 11.03.2017.Ankara 1 İdare Mahkemesi, 4558/3543, 11.03.2017.Ankara 3 BAM, 4558/3543, 11.03.2017.Ankara 3 BİM, 4558/3543, 11.03.2017.Danıştay 10 D, 2247/5111, 25.11.2011.Yargıtay 2 HD, 4558/3543, 11.03.2017.Anayasa Mahkemesi, 2014/13044, 11.11.2015.Yabancı mahkeme kararlarına OSCOLA’nın 2.1 ilâ 2.3 numaralı bölümlerinde gösterildiği şekilde atıf yapılmalıdır.Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi kararlarına aşağıda yer alan örneklerde gösterildiği şekilde atıf yapılmalıdır:•    Omojudi 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.KaynakçaKaynakçada öncelikle yazarın soyadına daha sonra adının ilk harfine yer verilir. Makalelerin sayfa aralığı gösterilir:Makalenin yazım dili Türkçe ise•    Erdem BB, Türk Vatandaşlık Hukuku (6. Bası, Beta 2017) 165.•    Çelikel A ve Öztekin Gelgel G, Yabancılar Hukuku (24. Bası, Beta 2019).•    Şanlı C, Esen E ve Ataman-Figanmeşe İ, Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk (6. Bası, Beta 2018).•    Tütüncü AN, ‘Montreux Convention ve Canal Istanbul’ (2017) 37(1) MHB 113-123.Makalenin yazım dili İngilizce ise•    Erdem BB, Türk Vatandaşlık Hukuku (6th, Beta 2017) 165.•    Çelikel A and Öztekin Gelgel G, Yabancılar Hukuku (24th edn, Beta 2019).•    Şanlı C, Esen E and Ataman-Figanmeşe İ, Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk (6th edn, Beta 2018).•    Tütüncü AN, ‘Montreux Convention and Canal Istanbul’ (2017) 37(1) MHB 113-123.Atıf kuralları hakkında ayrıntılı bilgi için bkz. OSCOLA 4th Edition.

<div><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/2991A311942E454E8B4DBF4B271350E3" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/5750CB1484324495A8C74D69447BFD44" target="_blank">Kapak Sayfası</a></div>

Aşağıdaki listede eksik olmadığından emin olun:●    Editöre mektup<ul><li>Makalenin türü</li><li>Başka bir dergiye gönderilmemiş olduğu bilgisi</li><li>Sponsor veya ticari bir firma ile ilişkisi (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>İstatistik kontrolünün yapıldığı (araştırma makaleleri için)</li><li>İngilizce yönünden kontrolünün yapıldığı</li><li>Yazarlara Bilgide detaylı olarak anlatılan dergi politikalarının gözden geçirildiği</li><li>Kaynakların OSCOLA 4’e göre belirtildiği</li></ul>●    <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/E53FB0CE54514A729F14BBA673C58319" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a>●    Daha önce basılmış ve telife bağlı materyal (yazı-resim-tablo) kullanılmış ise izin belgesi●    <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/31F96BBD2789401F92877085635FE53C" target="_blank">Kapak sayfası</a><ul><li>Makalenin türü</li><li>Makalenin Türkçe ve İngilizce başlığı</li><li>Yazarların ismi soyadı, unvanları ve bağlı oldukları kurumlar (üniversite ve fakülte bilgisinden sonra şehir ve ülke bilgisi de yer almalıdır), e-posta adresleri</li><li>Sorumlu yazarın e-posta adresi, açık yazışma adresi, iş telefonu, GSM, faks nosu</li><li>Tüm yazarların ORCID’leri</li></ul>●    Makale ana metni<ul><li>Makalenin Türkçe ve İngilizce başlığı</li><li>Özetler: 250 kelime Türkçe ve İngilizce</li><li>Anahtar Kelimeler: 5-15 adet Türkçe ve 5-15 adet İngilizce</li><li>Makale Türkçe ise, 600-800 kelime İngilizce genişletilmiş özet (Extended Summary)</li><li>Finansal destek (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Çıkar çatışması (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Teşekkür (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Kaynaklar</li><li>Tablolar-Resimler, Şekiller (başlık, tanım ve alt yazılarıyla)</li></ul>

Sayı Türü	Regular
Editör(ler)	Ömer Ekmekçi, Ali Paslı
Kapak (PDF)
Tam Metin (PDF)
Ön Sayfalar (PDF)

İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası

CİLT 80, SAYI 2, 2022

Alman Federal Mahkemesi’nin 17.10.2019 Tarihli Kararı Işığında Milletlerarası Yetki Anlaşmalarının İhlal Edilmesinin Tazminat Sorumluluğu Doğurması Hakkında Bir İnceleme

Anayasa Mahkemesi Toplu İş Sözleşmesi Özerkliğini Sınırlandırabilir mi?

Anonim Şirkette Azınlığın Korunması: Kim İçin, Neden ve Nasıl Bir Koruma?

Genetik Babanın Türk Soybağı Hukukundaki Yeri

Medenî Yargıda Hükmün Tamamlanmasının Hükmün Kesinleşmesi ve Cebrî İcrası Bakımından Etkisi

Roma Hukukunda Kusursuz Sorumluluğun Kusur Sorumluluğuna Dönüşüm Süreci ve Bu Dönüşümün Modern Hukuka Etkisi

1921 Anayasasının Türkiye’nin Mali Hukuk Düzenine Yansımaları

Cezalandırılmayan Önceki Hareketler

Geçici Koruma ve Mülteci Yükünün Paylaşılmasındaki Normatif Boşlukların Giderilmesiyle İlgili Öneriler

İnsan Hayatını Tehdit Eden Salgınlarla Mücadelede Küresel Bir Araç Olarak CITES

BİLGİ

PAYLAŞ