177 ARBITRATION LAW Some examples discussed by the Court of Cassation within the scope of public policy over the years may be summarized as independence and impartiality of arbitrators, contradiction of the mandatory norms of Turkish law, unreasoned arbitral awards, contradiction between the interim and the final awards of the arbitral tribunal, violation of legislation on public health and safety and tax legislation, not obtaining an expert report, not having a certified translation of the agreement, not issuing terms of reference, giving more value to the interests of one of the parties, the relationship between arbitral institutions and arbitrators appointed by these institutions, notification in a foreign language, arbitration costs, awards contradicting Turkish courts’ judgments, selection of more than one arbitral institution alternatively, awards relating to disputes that are not arbitrable under Turkish law, excessive interest rates and excessive contractual penalty.7 In some of these circumstances, the Court of Cassation established a violation of public policy and, in some cases, no violation was found. Discussing each matter and each decision will exceed the purpose of this newsletter article; therefore, a selection of circumstances discussed by the Court of Cassation will be addressed. Violation of the Mandatory Provisions of Turkish law It is generally accepted in the doctrine that violation of mandatory provisions of Turkish law does not violate public policy in every circumstance.8 In line with the Decision of the General Assembly and other decisions the Court of Cassation also established that violation of public policy will generally arise in cases where there is a violation of a mandatory provision, but not every violation of mandatory provision will violate public policy. The Decision of the 15th Civil Chamber dated 12.05.20149 interpreted the concept of public policy according to the Decision of the General Assembly, and stated that the public policy will be determined 7 Erdem, p. 718; Ekşi, p. 172; Nomer, Ergin: Devletler Hususi Hukuku, İstanbul, 2017, p. 570-571. 8 Erdem, p. 719; Ekşi, p. 172-174. 9 The 15th CC of the Court of Cassation, No. 2183/3226, 12.05.2014 (www.kazanci.com).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjUzNjE=