136 / 522
ment of the arbitral awards by the national courts
14
. For these reasons,
some states that arbitral tribunal is entitled to determine the validity of
a contract under the competition law for the purpose of ruling on com-
pensation
15
.
Furthermore, the ex officio application of the competition by the
arbitral tribunals is also discussed by the scholars. Some scholars states
that due to the statutory character of the competition law, the arbitral
tribunal should assess whether the relevant contract has anticompeti-
tive implications or impacts
16
. Therefore, any concerns on the arbitra-
bility of the competition law disputes on the basis of statutory charac-
ter of the competition law will be dismissed. It should be noted that the
arbitral tribunal’s ruling doesn’t affect the Competition Authority’s
power to initiate an investigation and take measures within the scope
of its exclusive powers.
Conclusion
Today the case law of EU and US tends to give a positive answer
to the question of arbitrability of the competition law disputes. As
Turkish Courts haven’t ruled on this question yet, the issue is widely
discussed by the Turkish scholars. Certain scholars answers in favor of
the international arbitration in conformity with the international trends.
Article 1/4 shouldn’t be deemed as an obstacle before the arbitrability
of the competition law disputes considering that other European States
having similar provisions in their relevant legislation already ruled in
favor of the arbitrability of the competition law disputes. Additionally,
arbitral tribunal’s power to rule on the preliminary questions on the
validity of a contract under Turkish competition law is also admitted
by certain scholars, which is in conformity with the international prac-
tice. Although the question of control of the arbitral award hasn’t
raised yet in Turkish law, a possible dispute should be resolved in
accordance with the EU case law, and Second Look Doctrine should be
taken into consideration.
120
NEWSLETTER 2015
14
Eco Swiss, p. 40.
15
Huysal
, p. 122.
16
Güven
, p. 448-449; Huysal, p. 124-126.