FORUM NON CONVENIENS DOKTRİNİ VE ULUSLARARASI PARALEL DAVALAR

Loading...
Publication Logo

Date

2019

Authors

Ekin SÖKMEN GÜLER

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Open Access Color

OpenAIRE Downloads

OpenAIRE Views

Research Projects

Journal Issue

Abstract

Her devlet kendi mahkemelerinin milletlerarası yetkisini belirleme hususundaserbesttir. Bunun bir sonucu olarak yabancılık unsuru taşıyan bir uyuşmazlıkbakımından birden çok ülke mahkemesinin yetkili olması mümkündür. Forum nonconveniens doktrininin uygulama alanı bulabilmesi için aynı dava bakımındanbirden çok ülke mahkemesinin milletlerarası yetkiyi haiz olması diğer bir deyişle söz konusu uyuşmazlık bakımından farklı devlet mahkemeleri arasında uluslararasıyetki çatışması olması gerekmektedir. Çünkü bu doktrinin esas tartışma konusu herbiri yetkili bu ülke mahkemelerinden hangisinde davanın görülmesinin en uygunolacağıdır. Forum non conveniens doktrinine benzer olarak uluslararası paraleldavaların ortaya çıkışı da yabancılık unsuru içeren ve birden fazla ülke ile ilişkisiolan uyuşmazlıklarda farklı ülke mahkemelerinin kendilerini bu uyuşmazlığınçözümü bakımından yetkili görmesi sonucu gerçekleşmiştir. İşte bu nedenle forumnon conveniens ile paralel davalar konuları birbiriyle çok yakından ilişkili vebağlantılı konulardır. Aynı davanın yabancı bir ülke mahkemesi önünde derdestolması mahkemenin forum non conveniens değerlendirmesi sırasında dikkatealacağı hususlardan birisidir. Öte yandan bazı milletlerarası metinlerde forum nonconveniens ve yabancı derdestlik meselelerinin iç içe geçerek düzenleme altınaalındığı görülmüştür.

Description

Keywords

Hukuk

Fields of Science

Citation

Akıncı Ziya: Milletlerarası Usul Hukukunda Yetki Sözleşmesine Dayanan\r\nYabancı Derdestlik Seçkin Yayıncılık Ankara 2002.Arzandeh Ardavan: “Should the Spiliada Test be Revised?” Journal of Private\r\nInternational Law Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1 2014 ss. 89-112.Barma Aarif/Elvin David: “Forum Non Conveniens: Where Do We Go from\r\nHere?” The Law Quarterly Review Cilt: 101 Sayı: 1 1985 ss. 48-67.Barrett Jr. Edward L.: “The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens” California\r\nLaw Review Cilt: 35 Sayı: 3 1947 ss. 380-422.Bayraktaroğlu Özçelik Gülüm: Milletlerarası Usul Hukukunda Paralel\r\nDavalar Yetkin Yayınları Ankara 2016.Beaumont Paul: “Great Britain” Declining Jurisdiction in Private International\r\nLaw Ed. J. J. Fawcett Oxford University Press New York 1995 ss. 207-\r\n233.Bell Andrew S.: Forum Shopping and Venue in Transnational Litigation\r\nOxford University Press New York 2003.Blair Paxton: “The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens in Anglo-American\r\nLaw” Columbia Law Review Cilt: 29 Sayı: 1 1929 ss. 1-34.Born Gary B./Rutledge Peter B.: International Civil Litigation in United States\r\nCourts Fifth Edition Wolters Kluwer Law & Business New York 2011.Bookman Pamela K.: “Litigation Isolationism” Stanford Law Review Cilt: 67\r\nSayı:5 2015 ss. 1081-1144.Brand Ronald A.: “Challenges to Forum Non Conveniens” New York\r\nUniversity Journal of International Law and Politics Cilt: 45 Sayı: 4\r\n2013 ss. 1003-1035.Brand Ronald A.: “Comperative Forum Non Conveniens and the Hague\r\nConvention on Jurisdiction and Judgments” Texas International Law\r\nJournal Cilt: 37 Sayı: 3 2002 (Comperative) ss. 467-498.Brand Ronald A./Jablonski Scott R.: Forum Non Conveniens: History Global\r\nPractice and Future Under the Hague Convention on Choice of Court\r\nAgreements Oxford University Press New York 2007.Burke John J. A.: “Foreclosure of the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens\r\nunder the Brussels I Regulation: Advantges and Disadvantages” The\r\nEuropean Legal Forum Sayı: 3-2008 2008 ss. 121-126.Calamita N. Jansen: “Rethinking Comity: Towards a Coherent Treatment of\r\nInternational Parallel Proceedings” Journal of International Law Cilt: 27\r\nSayı: 3 2006 ss. 601-680.Childress III Donald Earl: “Forum Conveniens: The Search for a Convenient\r\nForum in Transnational Cases” Virginia Journal of International Law\r\nDigest Cilt: 53 Sayı: 1 2012 ss. 157-179.Clarkson C.M.V./Hill Jonathan: The Conflict of Laws Fourth Edition Oxford\r\nUniversity Press New York 2011.Çelikel Aysel/Erdem B. Bahadır: Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk Beta İstanbul\r\n2016.Dardağan Esra: Milletlerarası Usul Hukukunda “Aşkın Yetki” Kavramı\r\nSiyasal Kitabevi Ankara 2005.Del Duca Louis F./Zaphiriou George A.: “United States of America”\r\nDeclining Jurisdiction in Private International Law Ed. J. J. Fawcett\r\nOxford University Press New York 1995 ss. 401-428.Dieterich Katherine R.: “Forum Non Conveniens and the Warsaw Convention:\r\nLeaving the Turbulence Behind?” Hofstra Law Review Cilt: 33 Sayı: 4\r\n2005 ss. 1507-1542.Dorward Daniel J.: “Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine and the Judicial\r\nProtection of Multinational Corporations from Forum Shopping Plaintiffs”\r\nJournal of International Law Cilt: 19 Sayı: 1 2014 ss. 141-168.Ekşi Nuray: “Milletlerarası Tahkimde Güncel İki Sorun: Hakemlerce Anti-Suit\r\nInjunction ve Punitive Tazminat Kararı Verilmesi” Uluslararası Ticaret ve\r\nTahkim Hukuku Dergisi Cilt:3 Sayı: 2 2014 ss. 3-36.Ekşi Nuray: Türk Mahkemelerinin Milletlerarası Yetkisi 2. Bası Beta\r\nİstanbul 2000 (Yetki).Elçin Doğa: “Forum Non Conveniens Doktrini” Prof. Dr. İlhan Unat’a\r\nArmağan Mülkiyeliler Birliği Yayın No: 2012/1 Ankara 2012 ss. 311-\r\n329.Fawcett James J.: “General Report” Declining Jurisdiction in Private\r\nInternational Law Ed. J. J. Fawcett Oxford University Press New York\r\n1995 ss. 1-70.Fawcett James J./Carruthers Janeen M./North Peter: Cheshire North &\r\nFawcett: Private International Law Fourteenth Edition Oxford University\r\nPress New York 2008.George James P.: “International Parallel Litigation – A Survey of Current\r\nConventions and Model Laws” Texas International Law Journal Cilt: 37\r\nSayı: 3 2002 ss. 499-540.Greenberg Mark D.: “The Appropriate Source of Law for Forum Non\r\nConveniens Decisions in International Cases: A Proposal fort he\r\nDevelopment of Federal Common Law” International Tax & Business\r\nLawyer Cilt: 4 1986 ss. 155-197.Janis M. W.: “The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens and The Bhopal Case”\r\nNetherlands International Law Review Cilt: 32 Sayı: 2 1987 ss. 192-204.Karayanni Michael: Forum Non Conveniens in the Modern Age: A\r\nComparative and Methodological Analysis of Anglo-American Law\r\nTransnational Publishers New York 2004.Kruger Thalia: Civil Jurisdiction Rules of the EU and Their Impact on Third\r\nStates Oxford University Press New York 2008.Manolis F. Mikis/Vermette Nathaly J./Hungerford Robert F.: “The Doctrine\r\nof Forum Non Conveniens: Canada and the United States Compared”\r\nFederation of Defense & Corporate Counsel Quarterly Cilt: 60 Sayı:1\r\nGüz 2009 ss. 3-34.of Mapesbury Lord Collins ve diğerleri (Ed.): Dicey Morris and Collins on\r\nThe Conflict of Laws Fifteenth Edition Cilt: 1 Sweet & Maxwell\r\nLondra 2012.McClean David: “The Right to a Fair Trial Forum Non Conveniens and the\r\nLimits of the Possible” A Commitment to Private International Law:\r\nEssays in Honour of Hans van Loon Intersentia Publishing Cambridge\r\n2013 ss. 357-369.McLachlan Campbell: Lis Pendens in International Litigation Martinus\r\nNijhoff Publishers Leiden 2009.Nomer Ergin: Devletler Hususi Hukuku 21. Bası Beta İstanbul 2015 (DHH).Nomer Ergin: Milletlerarası Usul Hukuku Beta İstanbul 2009 (Usul).Nygh Peter: “Forum Non Conveniens and Lis Alibi Pendens: the Australian\r\nExperience” Private Law in the International Arena: from National\r\nConflict Rules Towards Harmonization and Unification - Liber Amicorum\r\nKurt Siehr Ed. Jürgen Basedow Isaak Meier Anton K. Schnyder Talia\r\nEinhorn ve Daniel Girsberger T.M.C. Asser Press Lahey 2000.Özkan Işıl/Tütüncübaşı Uğur: Uluslararası Usul Hukuku Adalet Yayınevi\r\nAnkara 2017.Petsche Markus A.: “A Critique of the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens”\r\nEkim 2011 http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&\r\ncontext=markus_petsche (Erişim tarihi: 09.12.2018).Rosato Jennifer L.: “Restoring Justice to the Doctrince of Forum Non\r\nConveniens for Foreign Plaintiffs Who Sue U.S. Corporations in the \r\nFederal Courts” Journal of Comperative Business and Capital Market\r\nLaw Cilt: 8 1986 ss. 169-196.Sakmar Atâ: “Le Nouveau Droit International Privé Turc” Académie de Droit\r\nInternational Recueil des Cours Cilt: 4 No: 223 1990 ss. 303-416.Schulze H. Christian A. W.: “Forum Non Conveniens in Comperative Private\r\nInternational Law” The Sourth African Law Journal Cilt: 118 Sayı: 4\r\n2001 ss. 812-830.Silberman Linda: “A Proposed Lis Pendens Rule for Courts in the United\r\nStates: The International Judgments Project of the American Law\r\nInstitute” Intercontinental Cooperation Through Private International Law:\r\nEssays in Memory of Peter E. Nygh Ed. Talia Einhorn ve Kurt Siehr\r\nT.M.C. Asser Press Lahey 2004 ss. 341-356.Stuckelberg Martine: “Lis Pendens and Forum Non Conveniens at the Hague\r\nConference: The Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign\r\nJudgments in Civil and Commercial Matters” Brooklyn Journal of\r\nInternational Law Cilt: 26 Sayı: 3 2001 ss. 949-981.Şanlı Cemal/Esen Emre/Ataman-Figanmeşe İnci: Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk\r\nVedat Kitapçılık İstanbul 2014.Tang Zheng Sophia: “Conflicts of Jurisdiction and Party Autonomy in Europe”\r\nNetherlands International Law Review Cilt: 59 Sayı: 3 2012 ss. 321-359.Tate Christopher: “American Forum Non Conveniens in the Light of the Hague\r\nConvention on Choice-of-Court Agreements” University of Pittsburgh\r\nLaw Review Cilt: 69 Sayı: 1 2007 ss. 165-187.Whytock Christopher A./Robertson Cassandra Burke: “Forum Non\r\nConveniens and the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments” Columbia Law\r\nReview Cilt: 111 Sayı: 7 2011 ss. 1444-1521.Yeşilova Bilgehan: Milletlerarası Ticari Tahkimde Nihai Karardan Önce\r\nMahkemelerin Yardımı ve Denetimi Güncel Hukuk Yayınları İzmir\r\n2008.Zhenjie Hu: “Forum Non Conveniens: An Unjustified Doctrine” Netherlands\r\nInternational Law Review Cilt: 48 Sayı: 2 2001 ss. 143-169.Hague Conference on Private International Law Commission II Jurisdiction\r\nand Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters Nineteenth Session\r\nSummary of the Outcome of the Discussion in Commission II of the First Part of\r\nthe Diplomatic Conference 6-20 June 2001 Interim Text https://assets.hcch.net/\r\ndocs/e172ab52-e2de-4e40-9051-11aee7c7be67.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 27.12.2018)İngiltere Yüksek Mahkemeler Kanunu (Senior Courts Act) 1981\r\nhttps://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/54/contents (Erişim tarihi:\r\n27.12.2018).Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil\r\nand Commercial Matters adopted by the Special Commission and Report by\r\nPeter Nygh and Fausto Pocar Preliminary Document No 11 of August 2000\r\n(Preliminary Draft and Report) https://assets.hcch.net/upload/wop/\r\njdgmpd11.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 27.12.2018).The Leuven/London Principles on Declining and Referring Jurisdiction in Civil\r\nand Commercial Matters 69th Conference of the International Law Association\r\nResolution No. 1/2000 International Civil and Commercial Litigation 2000.The principles for determining when the use of the doctrine of forum non\r\nconveniens and anti-suit injunctions is appropriate Institut de Droit\r\nInternational Session de Bruges - 2003 Second Commission Resolution\r\n(Bruges Resolution) http://www.idi-iil.org/app/uploads/2017/06/2003_bru_\r\n01_en.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 27.12.2018)Third Interim Report: Declining and Referring Jurisdiction in International\r\nLitigation International Law Association Comitee on International Civil and\r\nCommercial Litigation London Conference 2000 (London Report).

WoS Q

Scopus Q

Source

Volume

Issue

Start Page

End Page

Google Scholar Logo
Google Scholar™

Sustainable Development Goals