Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses after UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention

Year 2021, Volume: 41 Issue: 1, 191 - 229, 01.06.2021

Dilek Aydemir

Abstract

Multi-tiered dispute resolution provides distinct stages, involving separate consecutive ADR procedures for dealing with and seeking to resolve disputes amicably first without a binding result (initial tiers), followed by a binding dispute resolution process, arbitration or litigation, as the last stage for a final and binding decision if the chosen ADR method does not work. Before complying with the ADR procedure in the dispute resolution clause of a contract, when one of the parties directly brings a claim before the arbitral tribunal, it is most likely that the other party will raise an objection regarding the effect of the non-fulfilment of ADR process. How will the tribunal decide regarding the issue? On the one side wording of such MTDR clauses is important on the other side it may be observed that mediation clauses are favourably enforced in comparison with negotiation clauses. Furthermore, the matter whether breach of the contract clause regarding initial ADR clauses is a substantive or procedural issue. Having decided these issues, a further question comes up: what would be the effect of non-fulfilment of such ADR clauses on an arbitration procedure. Of this question, there are several opinions and case reports opposing each other. With the praiseworthy effort of UNCITRAL UML on Mediation and the Singapore Convention together with the ADR rules of certain international dispute resolution institutions may encourage business people to make an effort to solve the disputes by enforcing the ADR procedures in their dispute resolution clauses.

Keywords

Arbitration mediation conciliation negotiation multi-tiered dispute resolution condition precedent admissibility UNCITRAL Model Law on Mediation Singapore Convention stay of proceeding

Supporting Institution

The author declared that this study has received no financial support.

References

  • Arroyo M (ed), Arbitration in Switzerland: The Practitioner’s Guide, (Kluwer Law International 2013).
  • Born G B, International Commercial Arbitration (2nd edition, Kluwer Law International 2014).
  • Bühring-Uhle C, Arbitration and Mediation in International Business, (Kluwer Law International 1995).
  • Ekşi N, Tahkim Öncesi Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Usulleri ve Bu Usuller Tüketilmeden Tahkime Başvurulmasının Sonuçları, (1st Edition, Beta 2015).
  • Geisinger E, Voser N (eds.), International Arbitration in Switzerland: A Handbook for Practitioners, (2nd edition, Kluwer Law International 2013).
  • Goldsmith J, Ingen-Housz A et al. (eds.), ADR in Business: Practice and Issues across Countries and Cultures I (Kluwer Law International 2006).
  • IBA Council, IBA Guidelines for Drafting International Arbitration Clauses, 2010.
  • IBA Litigation Committee, Handbook Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses, October 1, 2015.
  • Jenkins J, International Construction Arbitration Law, Arbitration in Context Series, Volume 3, (2nd edition, Kluwer Law International 2013).
  • Kaufmann-Kohler G, Rigozzi A, International Arbitration, Law and Practice in Switzerland (Oxford Press 2015). Özbek M S, Alternatif Uyuşmazlık Çözümü, Volume 1, (4. Edition, Yetkin 2016).
  • Paulsson J (ed), International Handbook on Commercial Arbitration Supplement No. 75 (Kluwer Law International 2013).
  • Poudret J F, Besson S, Comparative Law of International Arbitration, (Sweet&Maxwell 2007).
  • Taşpolat Tuğsavul M, Türk Hukukunda Arabuluculuk , (1st Edition, Yetkin 2012).
  • van den Berg A J (ed), New Horizons in International Commercial Arbitration and Beyond, (ICCA Congress Series 2004) Beijing Volume 12.
  • van den Berg A J (ed), International Arbitration: The Coming of a New Age?, (ICCA Congress Series 2013) Singapore Volume 17.
  • Yeşilova B, Milletlerarası Ticari Tahkimde Mahkemelerin Yardımı ve Denetimi, (1st Edition, Güncel Hukuk 2008).
  • Alexander Nadja, Speech at Singapur Sözleşmesi’nin Arabuluculuk Üzerine Yansımaları Sempozyumu (Symposium of the Reflection of Singapore Convention on Mediation), Turkey 2019, <https://adb.adalet.gov.tr/ekitap/sngprarbsempozyum.pdf>, 43-48.
  • Akkan M, ‘Arabuluculuk Faaliyeti Sonucunda Anlaşılan Hususlarda Dava Açma Yasağı ve Sonuçları’ (2018) 20(2) Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1-31. Berger K P, ‘Integration of Mediation Elements into Arbitration’ (2003) 19(3) Arbitration International, 387-402.
  • Berger K P, ‘Law and Practice of Escalation Clauses’ (2006) 22(1) Arbitration International, 1-18.
  • Bhomawat D, ‘Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses in Contracts- With special focus on Entertainment and Construction Contracts’ (2014) 1(3) IJRA.
  • Bělohlavek A J, Arbitration Agreement, MDR Clauses and Relation Thereof to Nature of Jurisdictional Decisions On The Break Of Legal Cultures, Część IV. Z problematyki międzynarodowej i prawa obcego, 401-427.
  • Born G B, ‘Planning for International Dispute Resolution’ (2000) 17(3) JIA, 61-72.
  • Boog C, ‘How to Deal with Multi‐tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses ‐ Note ‐ 6 June 2007 ‐ Swiss Federal Supreme Court’ (2008) 26(1) ASA Bulletin, 103-112.
  • Castillo James E, Speech at Singapur Sözleşmesi’nin Arabuluculuk Üzerine Yansımaları Sempozyumu (Symposium of the Reflection of Singapore Convention on Mediation), Turkey 2019, <https://adb.adalet.gov.tr/ekitap/sngprarbsempozyum.pdf>, 37-42.
  • Chapman S, ‘Multi-tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses: Enforcing Obligations to Negotiate in Good Faith’ (2010) 27(1) JIA, 89-98.
  • Chelli E A, ‘Fransız Yargıtay’ının Zorunlu Olmayan Uzlaşma Şartı Tüketilmeden Dava Açılabileceğine İlişkin 29 Nisan 2014 Tarihli Kararının Tercümesi’ 2015 (2) UTTDER, 233-237.
  • Chua E, ‘The Singapore Convention on Mediation—A Brighter Future for Asian Dispute Resolution’ 2019 (9) Asian Journal of International Law, 195-205.
  • Cortes P, The Promotion of Civil and Commercial Mediation in the UK University of Leicester School of Law Research Paper No. 15-23, 1-22.
  • Dilyara N, ‘The Combined Use of Mediation and Arbitration in Commercial Dispute Resolution: Results from an International Study’ 33, no. 1 (2016) JIA, 37-82.
  • Ekşi N, ‘Arabuluculuk Sonucunda Yapılan Milletlerarası Sulh Anlaşmaları Hakkında Birleşmiş Milletler Sözleşmesi: Singapur Konvansiyonu’ (2020) 9(1) UTTDER, 203-216.
  • Garimella S R and Siddiqui N A, ‘The Enforcement Of Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses: Contemporary Judicial Opinion’ 24 (1) 2016 IIUMLJ, 157-191.
  • Gharavi H G, ‘Effect of Alternative Dispute Resolution on Arbitration’, ICC Turkiye Milletlerasrası Tahkim Semineri, 2 Nisan 2010 Ankara.
  • Ginkel E, ‘The UNCITRAL Model on International Commercial Conciliation: A Critical Appraisal’ (2004) 21(1) JIA, 1-66.
  • Jiménez-Figueres D, ‘Amicable Means to Resolve Disputes: How the ICC ADR Rules Work’ (2004) 21(1) JIA, 91-102.
  • Jolles A, ‘Consequences of Multi- tier Arbitration Clauses: Issues of Enforcement’ (2006) 72(4) Arbitration, 329-338.
  • Kayalı D, ‘Enforceability of Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses’ (2010) 27(6) JIA (“Enforceability”), 551-577.
  • Kayalı D, ‘Uluslararası Ticari Sözleşmelerde Basamaklı Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Şartları’, Halûk Konuralp Anısına Armağan, Cilt 1 (Yetkin 2009) (“MTDRC”), 500-514.
  • Mattli W, ‘Private Justice in a Global Economy: From Litigation to Arbitration’ (2001) International Organization, 919-947.
  • Melnyk T, ‘The Enforceability of Multi-tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses: the English Law Position’ (2002) 5(4) Int. ALR 113-118.
  • Namlı M, ‘Belçika Hukuk Sisteminde Arabuluculuk Kurumunun Temel Esasları’ Arabuluculuk Yasa Tasarısı, Eleştirileri ve Öneriler (İstanbul 2008), 99-111.
  • Orejudo P, ‘The Law Applicable to International Mediation Contracts’ (2011) InDret 1, 2-16.
  • Oetike C and Walz C, ‘Non-Compliance with Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses in Switzerland’, (2017) 35(4), ASA Bulletin, 872-887.
  • Özel S, ‘Arabuluculuk Sonucunda Yapılan Milletlerarası Sulh Anlaşmaları Hakkında Birleşmiş Milletler Sözleşmesi: Singapur Konvansiyonu’ (2019) 25(2)Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, , Prof. Dr. Ferit Hakan Baykal Armağanı, 1190-1210.
  • Özsunay E, ‘Arabuluculuk Sonucunda Yapılan Uluslararası Sulh Anlaşmaları Hakkında Birleşmiş Milletler Sözleşmesi”: Singapur Arabuluculuk Sözleşmesi Türk Hukukuyla Uyumu Bakımından Bir Değerlendirme’ 2019 93(3) İstanbul Barosu Dergisi, 31-49.
  • Paulsson J, ‘Jurisdiction and Admissibility’ (2005) Global Reflections on International Law, Commerce and Dispute Resolution, Liber Amicorum in Honour of Robert Briner (International Chamber of Commerce), 601-617.
  • Petsche M, ‘Mediation as the Preferred Method to Solve International Business disputes? A Look into the Future’ (2013) 4 IBLJ, 251-266. Pryles M, ‘Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses’ (2001) 18(2) JIA, 159-176.
  • Reed L, ‘Ultima Thule: Prospects for International Commercial Mediation’ National University of Singapore Centre for International Law Working Paper 19/03 Schiefelbein Global Dispute Resolution Conference 2019, 1-23.
  • Queen Mary University Report on International Arbitration 2006.
  • Schnabel T, ‘The Singapore Convention on Mediation: A Framework for the Cross-border Recognition and Enforcement of Mediated Settlement’ 1 (2019)Pepp. Disp. Resolve. LJ, 1-60.
  • Silvestri E, ‘The Singapore Convention On Mediated Settlement Agreements: A New String To The Bow Of International Mediation?’ Revista Eletrônica de Direito Processual – REDP. Rio de Janeiro. Ano 13. Volume 20. Número 2. Maio a Agosto de 2019, 189-200.
  • Strong S I, ‘Use and Perception of International Commercial Mediation and Conciliation: A Preliminary Report on Issues Relating to the Proposed UNCITRAL Convention on International Commercial Mediation and Conciliation’ (Nov. 17, 2014), <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2526302> (accessed at 03.08.2020), 1-53.
  • Sussman E, ‘The Singapore Convention Promoting the Enforcement and Recognition of International Mediated Settlement Agreements’ 2018(3) ICC Dispute Resolution Bulletin, 42-54.
  • Tan Dehmen M, ‘Tahkim Öncesi Müzakere ya da Uzlaşma Yollarının Tüketilmemiş Olmasının Tahkim Yargılamasına Etkisi’, 2005-2006/1- 2 MHB, 451-472.
  • Tevendale C and Ambrose H, Naish V, 'Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses and Arbitration' (2015) 1 Turkish Commercial Law Review, 31-40.
  • Tochtermann P, ‘Agreements to Negotiate in the Transnational Context — Issues of Contract Law and Effective Dispute Resolution’ (2008) Unif. L. Rev. 13(3).
  • Vlavianos G M and Pappas V F L and Jones B, Multi-tier Dispute Resolution Clauses as Jurisdictional Condition Precedent to Arbitration in The Guide to Energy Arbitrations (ed. J William Rowley QC) ( 2nd Edition 2017) <https://globalarbitrationreview.com/chapter/1142626/multi-tier-dispute-resolution-clauses-as-jurisdictional-conditions-precedent-to-arbitration> (accessed 22.4.2020).
  • Zeller B and Trakman L, ‘Mediation and Arbitration: The Process of Enforcement’ (2019)1 Uniform Law Review UNSWLRS 43, 1-18 .

Arabuluculuk Hakkında Model Kanun 2018 ve Singapur Konvansiyonu’nundan Sonra Çok Aşamalı Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Sözleşmeleri

Year 2021, Volume: 41 Issue: 1, 191 - 229, 01.06.2021

Dilek Aydemir

Abstract

Çok aşamalı uyuşmazlık çözüm metodu uluslararası ticari uyuşmazlıkların çözümünde tercih edilen bir yöntemdir. Asıl sözleşmenin içerisinde ya da ayrı bir sözleşme olarak tahkim ya da mahkeme yargılaması öncesinde tarafların müzakere, arabuluculuk gibi alternatif uyuşmazlık çözüm metotları ile uyuşmazlığı çözmelerini öngören, bu sayede hem zaman hem masraf bakımından usul ekonomisine uygun bir çözüm metodu sunan, aynı zamanda taraflar arasındaki ticari ilişkilerin devamına da yarar sağlayan bu yöntem uygulamada çeşitli meseleleri beraberinde getirir. Bu meselelerin başlıcaları, tahkim öncesi alternatif uyuşmazlık çözüm yoluna başvurunun taraflar bakımından yerine getirilmesi zorunlu usulî bir adım teşkil edip etmemesi ve taraflardan birisinin örneğin tahkim öncesi alternatif uyuşmazlık çözüm yoluna başvurmaksızın doğrudan tahkim yargılamasını başlatması halinde bu durumun tahkim yargılamasına etkisidir. Uluslararası anlamda kabul görmüş ortak bir uygulama ya da kuralın söz konusu olmadığı ve farklı yargı sistemlerinin farklı görüşler benimsediği bu meseleler değerlendirilirken, ilmi ve kazai içtihatlar dikkate alınmalıdır. Bununla birlikte modern dünyada uyuşmazlıkların daha kısa sürede ve daha dostane yollarla çözülmesi amacı doğrultusunda çok aşamalı uyuşmazlık çözüm metotlarının uygulanması bakımından hem uluslararası uyuşmazlık çözüm kurumlarının hem de UNCITRAL’in çabaları dikkate değerdir. Özellikle arabuluculuk bakımından 2018 yılında güncellenmiş ve revize edilmiş versiyonu yayımlanan Arabuluculuk Model Kanunu ve aynı yıl imzaya açılan Singapur Konvansiyonu değerlendirilmelidir. Çalışmada bu iki uluslararası enstrümanın çok aşamalı uyuşmazlık çözüm klozlarında öngörülen usulün uygulanmasına olan etkisi değerlendirilmektedir

Keywords

Tahkim arabuluculuk çok aşamalı uyuşmazlık çözümü Singapur Konvansiyonu Arabuluculuk Model Kanunu kabul edilebilirlik dava şartı yargılamanın ertelenmesi

References

  • Arroyo M (ed), Arbitration in Switzerland: The Practitioner’s Guide, (Kluwer Law International 2013).
  • Born G B, International Commercial Arbitration (2nd edition, Kluwer Law International 2014).
  • Bühring-Uhle C, Arbitration and Mediation in International Business, (Kluwer Law International 1995).
  • Ekşi N, Tahkim Öncesi Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Usulleri ve Bu Usuller Tüketilmeden Tahkime Başvurulmasının Sonuçları, (1st Edition, Beta 2015).
  • Geisinger E, Voser N (eds.), International Arbitration in Switzerland: A Handbook for Practitioners, (2nd edition, Kluwer Law International 2013).
  • Goldsmith J, Ingen-Housz A et al. (eds.), ADR in Business: Practice and Issues across Countries and Cultures I (Kluwer Law International 2006).
  • IBA Council, IBA Guidelines for Drafting International Arbitration Clauses, 2010.
  • IBA Litigation Committee, Handbook Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses, October 1, 2015.
  • Jenkins J, International Construction Arbitration Law, Arbitration in Context Series, Volume 3, (2nd edition, Kluwer Law International 2013).
  • Kaufmann-Kohler G, Rigozzi A, International Arbitration, Law and Practice in Switzerland (Oxford Press 2015). Özbek M S, Alternatif Uyuşmazlık Çözümü, Volume 1, (4. Edition, Yetkin 2016).
  • Paulsson J (ed), International Handbook on Commercial Arbitration Supplement No. 75 (Kluwer Law International 2013).
  • Poudret J F, Besson S, Comparative Law of International Arbitration, (Sweet&Maxwell 2007).
  • Taşpolat Tuğsavul M, Türk Hukukunda Arabuluculuk , (1st Edition, Yetkin 2012).
  • van den Berg A J (ed), New Horizons in International Commercial Arbitration and Beyond, (ICCA Congress Series 2004) Beijing Volume 12.
  • van den Berg A J (ed), International Arbitration: The Coming of a New Age?, (ICCA Congress Series 2013) Singapore Volume 17.
  • Yeşilova B, Milletlerarası Ticari Tahkimde Mahkemelerin Yardımı ve Denetimi, (1st Edition, Güncel Hukuk 2008).
  • Alexander Nadja, Speech at Singapur Sözleşmesi’nin Arabuluculuk Üzerine Yansımaları Sempozyumu (Symposium of the Reflection of Singapore Convention on Mediation), Turkey 2019, <https://adb.adalet.gov.tr/ekitap/sngprarbsempozyum.pdf>, 43-48.
  • Akkan M, ‘Arabuluculuk Faaliyeti Sonucunda Anlaşılan Hususlarda Dava Açma Yasağı ve Sonuçları’ (2018) 20(2) Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1-31. Berger K P, ‘Integration of Mediation Elements into Arbitration’ (2003) 19(3) Arbitration International, 387-402.
  • Berger K P, ‘Law and Practice of Escalation Clauses’ (2006) 22(1) Arbitration International, 1-18.
  • Bhomawat D, ‘Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses in Contracts- With special focus on Entertainment and Construction Contracts’ (2014) 1(3) IJRA.
  • Bělohlavek A J, Arbitration Agreement, MDR Clauses and Relation Thereof to Nature of Jurisdictional Decisions On The Break Of Legal Cultures, Część IV. Z problematyki międzynarodowej i prawa obcego, 401-427.
  • Born G B, ‘Planning for International Dispute Resolution’ (2000) 17(3) JIA, 61-72.
  • Boog C, ‘How to Deal with Multi‐tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses ‐ Note ‐ 6 June 2007 ‐ Swiss Federal Supreme Court’ (2008) 26(1) ASA Bulletin, 103-112.
  • Castillo James E, Speech at Singapur Sözleşmesi’nin Arabuluculuk Üzerine Yansımaları Sempozyumu (Symposium of the Reflection of Singapore Convention on Mediation), Turkey 2019, <https://adb.adalet.gov.tr/ekitap/sngprarbsempozyum.pdf>, 37-42.
  • Chapman S, ‘Multi-tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses: Enforcing Obligations to Negotiate in Good Faith’ (2010) 27(1) JIA, 89-98.
  • Chelli E A, ‘Fransız Yargıtay’ının Zorunlu Olmayan Uzlaşma Şartı Tüketilmeden Dava Açılabileceğine İlişkin 29 Nisan 2014 Tarihli Kararının Tercümesi’ 2015 (2) UTTDER, 233-237.
  • Chua E, ‘The Singapore Convention on Mediation—A Brighter Future for Asian Dispute Resolution’ 2019 (9) Asian Journal of International Law, 195-205.
  • Cortes P, The Promotion of Civil and Commercial Mediation in the UK University of Leicester School of Law Research Paper No. 15-23, 1-22.
  • Dilyara N, ‘The Combined Use of Mediation and Arbitration in Commercial Dispute Resolution: Results from an International Study’ 33, no. 1 (2016) JIA, 37-82.
  • Ekşi N, ‘Arabuluculuk Sonucunda Yapılan Milletlerarası Sulh Anlaşmaları Hakkında Birleşmiş Milletler Sözleşmesi: Singapur Konvansiyonu’ (2020) 9(1) UTTDER, 203-216.
  • Garimella S R and Siddiqui N A, ‘The Enforcement Of Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses: Contemporary Judicial Opinion’ 24 (1) 2016 IIUMLJ, 157-191.
  • Gharavi H G, ‘Effect of Alternative Dispute Resolution on Arbitration’, ICC Turkiye Milletlerasrası Tahkim Semineri, 2 Nisan 2010 Ankara.
  • Ginkel E, ‘The UNCITRAL Model on International Commercial Conciliation: A Critical Appraisal’ (2004) 21(1) JIA, 1-66.
  • Jiménez-Figueres D, ‘Amicable Means to Resolve Disputes: How the ICC ADR Rules Work’ (2004) 21(1) JIA, 91-102.
  • Jolles A, ‘Consequences of Multi- tier Arbitration Clauses: Issues of Enforcement’ (2006) 72(4) Arbitration, 329-338.
  • Kayalı D, ‘Enforceability of Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses’ (2010) 27(6) JIA (“Enforceability”), 551-577.
  • Kayalı D, ‘Uluslararası Ticari Sözleşmelerde Basamaklı Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Şartları’, Halûk Konuralp Anısına Armağan, Cilt 1 (Yetkin 2009) (“MTDRC”), 500-514.
  • Mattli W, ‘Private Justice in a Global Economy: From Litigation to Arbitration’ (2001) International Organization, 919-947.
  • Melnyk T, ‘The Enforceability of Multi-tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses: the English Law Position’ (2002) 5(4) Int. ALR 113-118.
  • Namlı M, ‘Belçika Hukuk Sisteminde Arabuluculuk Kurumunun Temel Esasları’ Arabuluculuk Yasa Tasarısı, Eleştirileri ve Öneriler (İstanbul 2008), 99-111.
  • Orejudo P, ‘The Law Applicable to International Mediation Contracts’ (2011) InDret 1, 2-16.
  • Oetike C and Walz C, ‘Non-Compliance with Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses in Switzerland’, (2017) 35(4), ASA Bulletin, 872-887.
  • Özel S, ‘Arabuluculuk Sonucunda Yapılan Milletlerarası Sulh Anlaşmaları Hakkında Birleşmiş Milletler Sözleşmesi: Singapur Konvansiyonu’ (2019) 25(2)Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, , Prof. Dr. Ferit Hakan Baykal Armağanı, 1190-1210.
  • Özsunay E, ‘Arabuluculuk Sonucunda Yapılan Uluslararası Sulh Anlaşmaları Hakkında Birleşmiş Milletler Sözleşmesi”: Singapur Arabuluculuk Sözleşmesi Türk Hukukuyla Uyumu Bakımından Bir Değerlendirme’ 2019 93(3) İstanbul Barosu Dergisi, 31-49.
  • Paulsson J, ‘Jurisdiction and Admissibility’ (2005) Global Reflections on International Law, Commerce and Dispute Resolution, Liber Amicorum in Honour of Robert Briner (International Chamber of Commerce), 601-617.
  • Petsche M, ‘Mediation as the Preferred Method to Solve International Business disputes? A Look into the Future’ (2013) 4 IBLJ, 251-266. Pryles M, ‘Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses’ (2001) 18(2) JIA, 159-176.
  • Reed L, ‘Ultima Thule: Prospects for International Commercial Mediation’ National University of Singapore Centre for International Law Working Paper 19/03 Schiefelbein Global Dispute Resolution Conference 2019, 1-23.
  • Queen Mary University Report on International Arbitration 2006.
  • Schnabel T, ‘The Singapore Convention on Mediation: A Framework for the Cross-border Recognition and Enforcement of Mediated Settlement’ 1 (2019)Pepp. Disp. Resolve. LJ, 1-60.
  • Silvestri E, ‘The Singapore Convention On Mediated Settlement Agreements: A New String To The Bow Of International Mediation?’ Revista Eletrônica de Direito Processual – REDP. Rio de Janeiro. Ano 13. Volume 20. Número 2. Maio a Agosto de 2019, 189-200.
  • Strong S I, ‘Use and Perception of International Commercial Mediation and Conciliation: A Preliminary Report on Issues Relating to the Proposed UNCITRAL Convention on International Commercial Mediation and Conciliation’ (Nov. 17, 2014), <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2526302> (accessed at 03.08.2020), 1-53.
  • Sussman E, ‘The Singapore Convention Promoting the Enforcement and Recognition of International Mediated Settlement Agreements’ 2018(3) ICC Dispute Resolution Bulletin, 42-54.
  • Tan Dehmen M, ‘Tahkim Öncesi Müzakere ya da Uzlaşma Yollarının Tüketilmemiş Olmasının Tahkim Yargılamasına Etkisi’, 2005-2006/1- 2 MHB, 451-472.
  • Tevendale C and Ambrose H, Naish V, 'Multi-Tier Dispute Resolution Clauses and Arbitration' (2015) 1 Turkish Commercial Law Review, 31-40.
  • Tochtermann P, ‘Agreements to Negotiate in the Transnational Context — Issues of Contract Law and Effective Dispute Resolution’ (2008) Unif. L. Rev. 13(3).
  • Vlavianos G M and Pappas V F L and Jones B, Multi-tier Dispute Resolution Clauses as Jurisdictional Condition Precedent to Arbitration in The Guide to Energy Arbitrations (ed. J William Rowley QC) ( 2nd Edition 2017) <https://globalarbitrationreview.com/chapter/1142626/multi-tier-dispute-resolution-clauses-as-jurisdictional-conditions-precedent-to-arbitration> (accessed 22.4.2020).
  • Zeller B and Trakman L, ‘Mediation and Arbitration: The Process of Enforcement’ (2019)1 Uniform Law Review UNSWLRS 43, 1-18 .
There are 57 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Law in Context
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Dilek Aydemir 0000-0002-8262-5316

Publication Date June 1, 2021
Submission Date November 2, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2021 Volume: 41 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Aydemir, D. (2021). Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses after UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention. Public and Private International Law Bulletin, 41(1), 191-229.
AMA Aydemir D. Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses after UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention. PPIL. June 2021;41(1):191-229.
Chicago Aydemir, Dilek. “Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses After UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention”. Public and Private International Law Bulletin 41, no. 1 (June 2021): 191-229.
EndNote Aydemir D (June 1, 2021) Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses after UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention. Public and Private International Law Bulletin 41 1 191–229.
IEEE D. Aydemir, “Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses after UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention”, PPIL, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 191–229, 2021.
ISNAD Aydemir, Dilek. “Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses After UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention”. Public and Private International Law Bulletin 41/1 (June 2021), 191-229.
JAMA Aydemir D. Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses after UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention. PPIL. 2021;41:191–229.
MLA Aydemir, Dilek. “Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses After UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention”. Public and Private International Law Bulletin, vol. 41, no. 1, 2021, pp. 191-29.
Vancouver Aydemir D. Multi-Tiered Dispute Resolution Clauses after UML on Mediation 2018 and the Singapore Convention. PPIL. 2021;41(1):191-229.
 Download Cover Image