Turkey is a relatively young and developing jurisdiction in terms of both domestic and international arbitration. Yet, a legal and commercial tradition with respect to arbitration is becoming more and more clear in line with the international standards, the first essential step being the adoption of the International Arbitration Code in 2001, based on the UNCITRAL Model Law of 1985 on International Commercial Arbitration. The Code of Civil Procedure of 2011, which regulates domestic arbitration, is also based on the Model Law.

1.1 Advantages

Foreign contractors in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region may opt for Turkey as a seat of arbitration due to its clear legal framework for both international and domestic arbitration. Turkey, a party to the New York Convention (NYC) (entered into force on 30 September 1992), ensures enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. The Turkish Code of Private International Law and Procedure No. 5718 (CPILP) governs recognition and enforcement where the NYC is silent or inapplicable. The International Arbitration Code No. 4686 (IAC) applies to disputes with a foreign element, while the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (CCP) applies to domestic disputes without a foreign element. Arbitration is further supported by domestic institutions acting as appointing authorities (see below, Section 3.1 for details).

1.2 Disadvantages and common pitfalls

One of the main disadvantages of arbitration in Turkey is the cost. Compared to domestic court procedures, arbitration is much more costly, especially where the level of dispute is high.

Another disadvantage is the execution of international arbitral awards, which can sometimes be difficult due to long court and enforcement procedures. Although there are ample regulations on enforcement and execution, there are still some gaps. The process for obtaining an execution certificate may be prolonged due to procedural requirements.

1.3 Distinctive features

Turkey is a place of practical importance, especially for foreign contractors working in the MENA region choosing Turkey as a seat of arbitration, offering a certain predictability in terms of providing a legal framework for practitioners as a civil law jurisdiction.

2.1 Legal framework

Relevant treaties:

• ICSID Convention.
• New York Convention.
• Geneva Convention.

Relevant laws:

• Constitution of Turkey: Article 125(1) allows national/international arbitration for disputes from concession agreements and public service contracts.
• IAC: applies to disputes with a foreign element where Turkey is the arbitration seat.
• CCP: applies to disputes without a foreign element where Turkey is the arbitration seat.

Competent courts and chambers:

• Civil/Commercial Court of First Instance: handles arbitrator appointments, interim measures, and setting aside arbitral awards in domestic arbitrations.
• Regional Court of Appeal: reviews annulment decisions from the Civil Court of First Instance.
• Supreme Court of Appeals: final appellate body for recognising and enforcing foreign arbitral awards in Turkey.

2.2 What qualifies under domestic law as “international arbitration”? Is there a specific statute?

Article 1 of the IAC stipulates that the code applies to disputes with a foreign element which have Turkey as the place of arbitration. Article 2 defines a foreign element as present when any of the following applies, giving arbitration an international character:

• Parties’ domicile, habitual residence, or business place is in a different state.
• Parties’ domicile, habitual residence, or business place is in:
  • a state other than the specified arbitration place; or
  • a state other than where the contract obligations are performed or most connected to the dispute.
• A shareholder of a company party to the principal contract has foreign capital under investment promotion laws, or foreign credit/guarantees secure the contract’s financing.
• The principal contract or relationship involves transferring capital or goods between countries.

2.3 Ratification of the New York Convention

Turkey is one of the contracting states to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (“New York Convention”; NYC) which entered into force for Turkey on 2 July 1992.

2.4 Ratification of the ICSID Convention

Turkey signed the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States on 24 June 1987 and deposited its ratification of the ICSID Convention on 3 March 1989. The ICSID Convention entered into force in Turkey on 2 April 1989.

2.5 Other treaties relating to arbitration

Turkey became a party to the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of 21 April 1961 (“Geneva Convention”) on 21 April 1961 and ratified the Geneva Convention on 24 January 1992.

Turkey maintains arbitration clauses in its bilateral investment treaties and free trade agreements and is also a party to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Investment Agreement, which embraces investor–state arbitration as a dispute settlement mechanism.

2.6 Choice of forum for intra-EU dispute settlement

Not applicable for Turkey.

2.7 Is the municipal law governing arbitration based on UNCITRAL Model Law?

Turkey’s IAC is based on both the UNCITRAL Model Law and Switzerland’s Code of International Arbitration (Ziya Akıncı, “International Arbitration” (Milletlerarası Tahkim), Vedat Kitapçılık, 2021, p.71).

2.8 Recent amendments or reforms in arbitration laws

The 2018 amendments to the IAC address the competent court for setting aside procedures and subject-matter jurisdiction. Article 15 now designates the regional court of appeal with jurisdiction over the civil court of first instance for setting aside arbitral awards. Another change is the clarification of the appeal against the setting aside decisions rendered by the competent court. A new Additional Article 1 states that duties of the civil court of first instance may also be exercised by the commercial court of first instance, based on the dispute’s subject matter.

The main and most active local arbitration institutions are listed below. Please also see below, Section 17.1 for details on other dispute resolution boards.

3.1 Presence of local arbitration institutions

Key arbitration institutions in Turkey include:

• Istanbul Arbitration Centre (ISTAC): Arbitration Rules (2015) and Online Hearing Rules post-COVID-19.
• Istanbul Chamber of Commerce Arbitration and Mediation Centre (ITOTAM): Updated Arbitration Rules effective 31 March 2021.
• Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges Arbitration Council (TOBB).
• Energy Disputes Arbitration Centre (EDAC): headquartered in Ankara.

3.2 Does the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) have a local office?

No.

3.3 Does the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) have a local office?

No.

3.4 Does the ICC International Court of Arbitration have a local office?

The ICC has a national committee in Turkey (www.icc.tobb.org.tr). The National Committee of the ICC in Turkey (“ICC Turkey”) was established in 1934. The responsibility for the establishment and operations of ICC Turkey was assigned to TOBB in 1950. Today, ICC Turkey has approximately 250 members (www.icc.tobb.org.tr/icct-kurulusyapi.php).

3.5 Does the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) have a local office?

No.

3.6 Agreement entered into with local offices of international arbitration institutions

There are co-operation agreements between ISTAC and several well-known entities, such as the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC), the Qatar International Centre for Conciliation and Arbitration (QICCA) and the Swiss Arbitration Association (ASA), establishing a framework for these institutions to join forces in the promotion of arbitration as a method for peacefully settling international disputes.

The existence of a valid and effective arbitration agreement is important in practice and court decisions. Article 4 of the IAC specifically defines what constitutes an arbitration agreement and provides that it is regarded as separate from the main contract.

4.1 Requirements as to content and form

Article 4(2) of the IAC requires arbitration agreements to be in writing, including communication via letter or email. The requirement is also deemed to be fulfilled in case of the claimant’s assertion of the existence of a written arbitration agreement, if there is no objection made by the respondent in its reply. A valid arbitration agreement shall also be deemed to have been concluded if a reference is made to a document containing an arbitration clause in order to make it a part of the main contract.

Article 26 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (TCO) allows parties to determine the content of the agreement within legal limits which, under Article 27, excludes provisions violating law, morality, public order, personal rights, or involving impossible contracts.

4.2 Validity of arbitration agreements

Parties must have full legal capacity to conclude a valid arbitration agreement. Under Article 4(3) of the IAC, an arbitration agreement is valid if it complies with the law agreed by the parties or, if none, Turkish law. Article 504(3) of the TCO and Article 74(1) of the CCP require representatives/proxies to have special authority to conclude such agreements.

4.3 Special formalities

Article 1 of Law No. 805 mandates agreements to be in Turkish if both parties are Turkish companies or enterprises.

4.4 Governing law

Parties determine the seat, language, and governing law of arbitration. Article 4(3) of the IAC validates arbitration agreements if they comply with the law agreed by the parties or, if none, Turkish law. Article 12 clarifies that the parties’ choice of law applies only to its substantive law, excluding conflict of law and procedural rules. If no governing law is agreed upon, the arbitral tribunal applies the substantive law of the state most closely connected to the dispute.

Even though arbitrability is also an issue that is often discussed within the court decisions, Turkish practice adopts an increasingly progressive approach.

5.1 Applicable restrictions

Article 1(4) of the IAC and Article 408 of the CCP restrict arbitration for disputes involving in rem rights over immovable property in Turkey and matters outside the parties’ disposal. Disputes related to criminal, administrative, employment, and family law cannot be arbitrated. However, disputes over immovable property in Turkey unrelated to in rem rights, like construction issues, are arbitrable.

6.1 Stay of proceedings

Article 11 of the IAC provides that if a party loses its standing, arbitration is postponed, and the arbitration period is suspended. If no notification is made within six months or no intention to continue is stated, the arbitration ceases.

6.2 Anti-suit injunctions

The lack of a lis pendens was a condition in the former Turkish CCP for filing a lawsuit, but the CCP no longer demands this in the conditions of cause of action.

In terms of anti-suit injunctions, the local courts accept the plea of lis pendens if there are international agreements regulating this matter. The CPILP does not contain a specific provision on lis pendens.

7.1 Restrictions on the parties’ freedom to choose arbitrators

Turkish law imposes no restrictions on choosing arbitrators. Article 415 of the CCP and Article 7(A) of the IAC require the number of arbitrators to be odd. If parties fail to agree, three arbitrators are appointed. Appointment rules are detailed below, in Section 7.3.

7.2 Requirement of arbitrator independence and impartiality

A valid arbitration award requires arbitrators to be independent and impartial, ensuring a fair trial. Article 7(C) of the IAC mandates that arbitrators disclose any circumstances raising doubts about their impartiality or independence before accepting the role and promptly notify parties of any arising later.

7.3 Mandatory rules applicable to the appointment process

Parties may determine the procedure for appointing arbitrators. If the agreed procedure fails due to non-compliance, disagreement, or inaction by a designated authority, the court of first instance appoints the arbitrator(s) upon request. The court considers party agreements, independence and impartiality, and applies the following criteria for nationality:

• A sole arbitrator should not share the nationality of either party.
• Where there are three arbitrators, at least two should not share the nationality of either party.

Article 7(C) of the IAC requires appointed arbitrators to disclose conflicts of interest.

7.4 Appointment mechanism in the absence of party agreement or applicable institutional rules

Turkish law provides an appointment mechanism under Article 416 of the CCP and Article 7(B) of the IAC when no agreement or rules apply:

• Only natural persons can be arbitrators.
• For a sole arbitrator, if parties cannot agree, the court appoints the arbitrator upon request.
• For three arbitrators, each party appoints one arbitrator, and those two then select the third as presiding arbitrator. If appointments fail within 30 days, the court appoints upon request.
• For more than three arbitrators, each party equally selects those responsible for appointing the final arbitrator.

7.5 Mandatory rules applicable to the replacement process

According to Article 7(G) of the IAC, if the mandate of the arbitrator terminates for any reason, the new arbitrator must be appointed following the procedure used for the original appointment. This does not suspend the arbitration period.

If the arbitration agreement specifies the arbitrator(s), the arbitration shall terminate if the mandate of the arbitrator(s) ends for any reason.

7.6 Mandatory disclosure obligations

Arbitrators must disclose any circumstances that may raise doubts about their impartiality or independence before accepting the role and promptly notify parties of any arising later.

7.7 Grounds for challenge

Under Article 7(C) of the IAC, an arbitrator may be dismissed for lacking agreed qualifications, violating agreed procedures, or if doubts about impartiality arise.

7.8 Mandatory rules governing the challenge of arbitrators

Article 7(D) of the IAC allows parties to agree on the procedure for challenging arbitrators. Challenges must be made within 30 days of selection or awareness of grounds, with notice to the tribunal and the other party. If dismissed, an application can be made to the commercial court within 30 days. Challenges affecting the tribunal or a majority of arbitrators must be brought to this court, which may terminate arbitration or require re-selection.

7.9 Removal

Under Article 7(F) of the IAC, an arbitrator’s authority ends if they cannot fulfil duties, either by withdrawal or party agreement. Disputes over withdrawal may be referred to the commercial court.

7.10 Liability and immunity of arbitrators

Under Article 7(E) of the IAC, an arbitrator is liable for damages if they fail to fulfil duties without a justifiable reason, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.

A preliminary injunction and attachment may be sought from the local courts either prior to or during the arbitral proceedings.

8.1 Interim measures

8.1.1 Overview of interim measures

Article 6 of the IAC allows arbitrators and courts to grant interim injunctions and attachments, excluding actions requiring enforcement bodies, official authorities, or binding third parties. Courts can enforce tribunal orders upon request. This applies even if the seat of arbitration is outside Turkey. Court-granted interim relief before arbitration requires arbitration referral within 30 days or becomes ineffective.

8.1.2 Relevance of availability of emergency arbitrator mechanism

It is possible to request measures from emergency arbitrators under relevant institutional rules. Legal regulations have no specific provisions regarding the use of emergency arbitrators.

8.2 Taking of evidence

Evidence at risk of loss or future difficulty may be immediately examined and recorded by the court. Arbitral tribunals may request court assistance for obtaining information and documents, with the court applying CCP provisions.

8.3 Appointment or challenge of arbitrators

Please see above, Sections 7.3 and 7.8. 

8.4 Other available assistance

No other types of assistance to arbitrations are commonly available.

9.1 Domestic scope of sovereign immunity from jurisdiction

The recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards are subject to the CPILP. Article 49 of  the CPILP states that foreign states are not afforded an exemption of sovereign immunity with respect to disputes arising from private-law relationships. In such cases, it is possible to serve a notification to the diplomatic representatives of the foreign state.

9.2 Immunity from execution

Turkish courts must examine jurisdictional immunity ex officio, and its presence prevents enforcement decisions. Under Article 32(2) of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code No. 2004 (EBC), awards against foreign states can be enforced against their assets, but Article 42(2) prohibits enforcement without a judgment. Assets allocated for public purposes or granted enforcement immunity under international law are exempt from enforcement proceedings in Turkey (see www.ibanet.org/document?id=cross-border-enforcement-Turkey).

Arbitral tribunals may decide on hearings, but under Article 11 of the IAC, a hearing is mandatory if requested by a party. The tribunal must notify parties of discovery dates, meetings, hearings, and any consequences of non-appearance.

Turkish law does not mandate confidentiality in arbitral proceedings. Parties may agree on confidentiality or refer to arbitration centre rules imposing such obligations.

12.1 Requirements as to content and form

Article 14 of the IAC requires arbitral awards to include party details, legal grounds and reasoning, awarded amounts, arbitration seat, date, tribunal member details, dissenting opinions (if any) and a statement on annulment rights. Article 436(1) of the CCP sets out the content of the arbitral awards in a similar way for domestic arbitrations.

12.2 Time limit

Article 10(B) of the IAC sets a one-year limit for awards unless otherwise agreed, starting from the sole arbitrator’s selection or the first tribunal meeting.

12.3 Remedies

Arbitrators can award monetary damages and declaratory relief, make rulings on the validity of a contract or the fulfilment of contract obligations, and they can also award arbitration costs and legal costs, and issue interim injunctions.

13.1 Interpretation and correction of awards

Article 14(B) of the IAC allows parties to request corrections, interpretations, or complementary awards within 30 days of award notification. If justified, complementary awards must be issued within 60 days. These form part of the final award and are communicated to the parties.

13.2 Challenge of an award

Arbitral awards may be annulled under Article 15 of the IAC or Article 439 of the CCP (domestic arbitrations). Grounds include:

• lack of legal capacity or invalid arbitration agreement;
• improper tribunal appointment;
• arbitral award rendered outside the arbitration period;
• wrongful jurisdiction decision;
• exceeding authority or failing to address claims;
• procedural violations affecting the substance of the decision; or
• violation of party equality.

Awards can also be annulled if the dispute is not arbitrable or the award violates public order. Annulment actions must be filed within 30 days of notification. Filing suspends enforcement for international arbitrations but not for domestic arbitrations unless a court grants suspension upon the provision of security.

13.3 Recognition and enforcement proceedings

Article 60 of the CPILP designates the competent court for enforcing foreign arbitral awards as the court of the party’s domicile, residence, or property location in Turkey, in that order. Courts must follow this order and jurisdiction objections may result in dismissal. The assigned court is the civil/commercial court of first instance.

13.4 Cost of enforcement

Article 4 of the Law on Fees requires proportional fees for enforcement actions, although courts lack consensus on proportional versus lump sum fees. Article 48 of the CPILP mandates that foreign parties in Turkish legal actions provide court-determined security.

13.5 Enforcement of orders of emergency arbitrators

Emergency arbitrator orders lack regulation and are rarely applied, with no public data available. These decisions, though debated as judicial, impose contractual liability on parties.

Although the IAC is applicable until the enforcement stage in the arbitration of disputes that have a foreign element and the seat of arbitration is Turkey, the enforcement stage is regulated by the NYC and the CPILP in Turkish law.

14.1 Process for enforcing New York Convention awards

Turkey ratified the NYC with both reciprocity and commercial business reservations.

For procedural matters not covered by the NYC, the CCP, CPILP, and other legislation applies. Courts follow révision au fond (e.g. Supreme Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit, Decision No. 3263/7408, T.27.22.2018) assessing enforcement conditions without reviewing merits.

14.2 Grounds for resisting enforcement of New York Convention awards

Arbitrability (detailed above, Section 5) or public order issues are reviewed ex officio.

Other main obstacles include the validity of the arbitration agreement and the tribunal’s composition or procedure being contrary to the parties’ agreement or the law.

The Turkish Supreme Court of Appeals was previously criticised for using public order to deny recognition or enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, particularly up to the 2000s. However, with the development of an arbitration culture, such objections have become less common. The Supreme Court defines public order as, “the totality of the rules protecting the basic structure and interests of the society” (Grand General Assembly on the Unification of Judgments (E.2010/1, K.2012/1, T.10.02.2012)).

Enforcement may be denied if the award conflicts with public order, including cases involving tax-related issues, as tax legislation is considered a matter of public order. Other common grounds include arbitrators’ lack of independence or impartiality (e.g., bribery), procedural violations (in particular, failure to respect the right to be heard), or awards based on claims involving activities such as gambling, human trafficking, smuggling of historical artifacts, tax evasion, or customs duties avoidance.

14.3 Enforcing non-Convention awards

Judicial assistance treaties in civil and commercial matters apply to enforcement of awards from non-NYC states, but Articles 60–63 of the CPILP govern enforcement when no treaty applies, mirroring NYC principles.

Professional rules that ensure a fair, fast and efficient process, along with well-accepted standards of conduct, such as the IBA Guidelines, also apply to Turkish arbitration practice, although certain approaches may differ due to the nature of the civil law, unique procedural law requirements, the arbitral institution’s own rules, and the parties’ agreement.

15.1 Applicable to counsel

International standards of conduct align with Turkish arbitration practice, within legal and contractual limits. The 1971 Code of Professional Conduct of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations governs professional rules under various categories. Article 34 of the Law on Advocacy requires lawyers to act with diligence, integrity and honour, while Article 134 prescribes disciplinary penalties for violations of professional ethics and duties, set by the Union of Turkish Bar Associations.

15.2 Applicable to arbitrators

Turkey follows international standards and institutional rules, alongside the CCP and IAC. The Istanbul Arbitration Association (ISTA) Arbitrators’ Code of Ethics (2018) outlines qualifications and rules for arbitrators, including fair and efficient proceedings, impartiality and independence, notification and communication with the parties, a relationship of trust and confidentiality, and fair fee determination.

Third-party funding in international arbitration is increasing, influencing counsel selection, litigation strategy, and client relationships. While conflicts of interest occur, Turkish law lacks specific rules or practices on disclosure or regulation of third-party funding in arbitration.

16.1 Applicable regulatory requirements

Since there is no legislation on the validity of third-party financing, the financing agreement is evaluated under the freedom of contract in the law of obligations and must meet the validity requirements for all contracts.

In bankruptcy, attachable assets form the bankruptcy estate and the insolvent party’s power of disposition is transferred to the bankruptcy administration, so the bankruptcy administration must consent to claims pursued through third-party funding under the EBC.

16.2 Overview of the third-party funding market

Although there are no finance institutions in Turkey that provide funding for arbitration, it is noted that Turkish investors are engaging foreign third-party funders for their disputes in arbitration. One example of this is the construction sector where contractors, who either cannot fund the case due to insolvency or lack the resources for arbitration, increasingly seek third-party funding to initiate arbitration.

Turkey is not known for a specific type of arbitration, with disputes covering areas like construction, energy, transport, leasing, and intellectual property. There are no specialised courts designated to hear arbitration-related matters under the Turkish legal system. However, a few institutions are noteworthy, although their practical application remains limited.

17.1 Types of specialist arbitration

The Energy Disputes Arbitration Center (EDAC), based in Ankara, resolves energy and infrastructure disputes in Central Asia, Europe, the Balkans, and the Middle East (operational since 2020). Turkey is also a party to the Energy Charter Treaty. Sectoral institutional arbitration exists, such as the Turkish Travel Agencies, Seed Growers Association, and Capital Markets Customer Dispute Centres. Some cases, such as those handled by the Consumer Arbitration Board and Insurance Arbitration Commissions, are formally similar to arbitration but differ significantly in nature.

17.2 Key legal principles

In arbitration cases under special laws, specific provisions in the relevant law apply; otherwise, general arbitration rules are followed.

17.3 Types of claim and defences typically brought in that area

Due to the limited and distinct nature of the arbitration framework outlined above, common claims and defences can vary significantly depending on the specific arbitration context.

In sector-specific arbitration (e.g., EDAC), disputes often involve compliance with contractual obligations, delays, or damages.

In cases of mandatory arbitration (e.g., consumer or insurance arbitration), claims typically focus on contract violations or service disputes, while defences may rely on procedural non-compliance or lack of jurisdiction.

17.4 Issues and strategic considerations to take note of

Strategic considerations could include confirming the arbitral body’s jurisdiction, especially under special or mandatory arbitration rules, and strictly adhering to procedural requirements and timelines. Selecting arbitrators with relevant expertise is particularly important in sector-specific disputes.

Over the past decade, Turkey has made significant efforts to become a leading international arbitration hub, an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction, and a preferred seat. Public awareness of arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution method is supported by the state and legal professionals. Istanbul hosts notable international arbitration events, while arbitration agreements and cases involving Turkish parties are steadily increasing. Both international and domestic arbitration cases that involve Turkish parties are increasing, and arbitration agreements are becoming more common in practice.

ISTAC, Turkey’s leading arbitration institution, was established within the Istanbul Financial Centre project to provide international-standard services for domestic and cross-border disputes. Turkey’s strategic location and ISTAC’s co-operation with institutions like the PCA, ASA and HKIAC reinforce its position. Heavy civil court caseloads also support the use of arbitration as a state policy.

Arbitration in specific industries, particularly construction, is growing, with increasing use of International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) contracts and dispute adjudication boards, largely due to the extensive international operations of Turkish construction companies and the involvement of third-party funders in local projects. As the construction sector expands, the volume of arbitration work in this industry is expected to rise, driven by the frequent use of alternative dispute resolution methods, particularly arbitration. Considering its direct and indirect effects on other sectors, the construction sector’s share of the Turkish economy amounts to 30% (Turkish Contractors Association’s Turkish Overseas Contracting Services Report for 2024).

Investment arbitration remains significant, with Turkey actively participating in PCA and ICSID cases. Turkey has signed bilateral investment treaties (BIT) with 98 countries, 76 of which are currently in force, and there are 23 free trade agreements in force.

Turkish state courts are recognising the principles of arbitration and taking a constructive approach towards matters such as the validity of arbitration agreements, preliminary objections on jurisdiction, conditions for annulment, and enforceability. The principles of good faith, rule of honesty, and standards like the expectations from a “prudent merchant” are commonly applied by the courts.

The Supreme Court of Appeals emphasises clarity in arbitration agreements, ruling that ambiguous clauses invalidate arbitration (e.g., Decision No. E.2022/3703, K.2023/1043).

A recent appeal decision reveals increased acceptance of arbitration in corporate disputes (see: Istanbul Regional Court of Justice, 14th Civil Chamber, E.2022/1843, K.2022/1373, T.20.11.2022) despite past decisions excluding certain matters like joint stock company dissolution (Supreme Court of Appeals, 11th Civil Chamber, E.2011/13485, K.2012/19915, T.05.12.2012; E.2014/141, K.2014/6951, T.09.04.2014).

Although Turkey’s institutional arbitration experience is developing, the jurisdiction is making strides with its experienced academics and practitioners active in global arbitration institutions such as ICC, LCIA, the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC), and the Vienna International Arbitral Centre (VIAC). Turkish law is aligning with established pro-arbitration jurisdictions, enhancing its appeal as an arbitration hub.