根据《土耳其国际仲裁法》搁置与公共政策相矛盾的仲裁裁决

Q2 Social Sciences

Global Jurist Pub Date : 2021-06-28 DOI:10.1515/gj-2021-0038

Asli Bayata Canyas

{"title":"根据《土耳其国际仲裁法》搁置与公共政策相矛盾的仲裁裁决","authors":"Asli Bayata Canyas","doi":"10.1515/gj-2021-0038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study analyses the setting aside of arbitral awards for contradicting public policy according to the Turkish International Arbitration Act. In a setting aside action, the arbitral award is not scrutinized on its merits; rather, only certain grounds are taken into consideration. One ground that judges evaluate on their own motion is being against public policy. We believe that a more international public policy understanding that is in harmony with the needs and requirements of international arbitration should be adopted.","PeriodicalId":34941,"journal":{"name":"Global Jurist","volume":"22 1","pages":"157 - 175"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2021-0038","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Setting Aside Arbitral Awards for Contradicting Public Policy According to the Turkish International Arbitration Act\",\"authors\":\"Asli Bayata Canyas\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/gj-2021-0038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This study analyses the setting aside of arbitral awards for contradicting public policy according to the Turkish International Arbitration Act. In a setting aside action, the arbitral award is not scrutinized on its merits; rather, only certain grounds are taken into consideration. One ground that judges evaluate on their own motion is being against public policy. We believe that a more international public policy understanding that is in harmony with the needs and requirements of international arbitration should be adopted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Jurist\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"157 - 175\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2021-0038\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Jurist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2021-0038\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Jurist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2021-0038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本研究分析了根据土耳其《国际仲裁法》因违反公共政策而撤销仲裁裁决的情况。在撤销诉讼中，仲裁裁决不受案情审查；相反，只考虑某些理由。法官们主动评估的一个理由是反对公共政策。我们认为，应该采取一种更符合国际仲裁需要和要求的国际公共政策理解。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Setting Aside Arbitral Awards for Contradicting Public Policy According to the Turkish International Arbitration Act

Abstract This study analyses the setting aside of arbitral awards for contradicting public policy according to the Turkish International Arbitration Act. In a setting aside action, the arbitral award is not scrutinized on its merits; rather, only certain grounds are taken into consideration. One ground that judges evaluate on their own motion is being against public policy. We believe that a more international public policy understanding that is in harmony with the needs and requirements of international arbitration should be adopted.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Global Jurist Social Sciences-Law

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Global Jurist offers a forum for scholarly cyber-debate on issues of comparative law, law and economics, international law, law and society, and legal anthropology. Edited by an international board of leading comparative law scholars from all the continents, Global Jurist is mindful of globalization and respectful of cultural differences. We will develop a truly international community of legal scholars where linguistic and cultural barriers are overcome and legal issues are finally discussed outside of the narrow limits imposed by positivism, parochialism, ethnocentrism, imperialism and chauvinism in the law. Submission is welcome from all over the world and particularly encouraged from the Global South.