Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

FIDIC İNŞAAT SÖZLEŞMELERİNDE TALEP BİLDİRİMLERİ KITA AVRUPASI HUKUKU VE ANGLO-SAKSON HUKUKU MUKAYESESİ

Year 2022, Volume: 19 Issue: 3, 391 - 448, 15.10.2022

Sinem Özyiğit

Abstract

Günümüzde en yaygın kullanılan inşaat sözleşmesi formları FIDIC tarafından hazırlananlardır. Bu formlarda yer alan en önemli hükümlerden biri talep prosedürüne ilişkin hükümler olup, bir talebin zamanında ve usulüne uygun olarak karşı tarafa bildirilmesi bu prosedürün ilk adımıdır. Böyle bir bildirimde bulunulmaması hâlinde ise sözleşme tarafları ek süre ve/veya ek ücret hakkından mahrum kalacaklardır. Hukuk literatüründe Kıta Avrupası perspektifinden bu gibi önemli bir hükmü inceleyen çalışmaların şaşırtıcı şekilde ender olduğunu gözlemliyoruz. Hâl böyle olunca çalışmamızdaki esas hedefimiz bu eksikliği elimizden geldiğince gidermektir. İlk bölümde FIDIC sözleşmeleri hakkında genel bir açıklama yapacağız. Ardından, inşaat sektöründe uyuşmazlıkların çoğunlukla bildirim hükümlerine aykırılıktan doğduğunu düşünerek, bir talep bildiriminin geçerliliği için FIDIC sözleşmelerinde öngörülen şekil ve süre düzenlemeleri üzerinde duracağız. Nihayet, bildirim hükümlerinin katı bir şekilde uygulanmasının önüne geçmek için kullanılabilecek argümanları saptayacağız. Bu değerlendirmeyi yaparken, Kıta Avrupası ve Anglo-Sakson hukuk sistemlerinden güncel yargı kararlarına başvuracağız.

Keywords

İnşaat Sözleşmeleri FIDIC Talep Talep Bildirimleri

References

  • Akıncı Z, Milletlerarası Özel Hukukta İnşaat Sözleşmeleri (Adalet 1996).
  • Antalya O G, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler Cilt 1 (Legal 2018).
  • Antalya O G and Doğancı E D, ‘Genel İşlem Koşullarında Saydamlık Kuralının, Bunun TBK m. 20 vd.’daki Görünümlerinin ve TTK m. 55 f. 1 f ile TBK m. 20 vd.’nın Birlikte Uygulanabilirliğinin Değerlendirilmesi’ (2018) 24(2) MÜHFHAD 823.
  • Atamer Y M, ‘Genel İşlem Koşulu Mu Bireysel Pazarlıkla Kurulan Sözleşme mi?’ in Çiğdem Kırca (ed), Yeni Türk Borçlar Kanunu ve Yeni Türk Ticaret Kanunu Sempozyumu (Vedat 2013).
  • Atamer Y M, Sözleşme Özgürlüğünün Sınırlandırılması Sorunu Çerçevesinde Genel İşlem Şartlarının Denetlenmesi (2nd edn, Beta 2010).
  • Atamer Y M, Tacirlerin Genel İşlem Şartlarına Karşı Korunması Yolları (İTO 2001).
  • Bailey J, Construction Law (2nd edn, Informa Law from Routledge 2016).
  • Baker E, Mellors B, Chalmers S and Laver A, FIDIC Contracts: Law and Practice (Informa 2013).
  • Bell A, Hall N, ‘Employer Claims under FIDIC: Where Are We Now?’ (Turkish Commercial Law Review, Winter 2016) <http://the-tclr.org/employer-claims-fidic-now/> accessed 15 December 2021.
  • Bremen J, Ammar L B, ‘Contractors’ Claims, Remedies and Reliefs’ (Global Arbitration Review, 12 December 2017) <https://globalarbitrationreview.com/chapter/1145221/contractors-claims-remedies-and-reliefs> accessed 18 December 2021.
  • Budak S A, ‘Türk Eser Sözleşmesi Hukuku Işığında FIDIC Sözleşmeleri’ in Yeşim M. Atamer, Ece Baş Süzel and Elliott Geisinger (eds), Uluslararası İnşaat Sözleşmeleri ve Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları (On İki Levha 2018).
  • Büyüksağiş E, ‘İçerik Denetiminin Müzakere Edilmemiş Sözleşme Hükümleriyle Sınırlanması Üzerine: Mostaza Claro’nun Düşündürdükleri’ (2013) 8 (Special Issue) Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi 675.
  • Büyüksağiş E, ‘Turkish Contract Law Reform: Standard Terms, Unforeseen Circumstances, and Judicial Intervention’ (2016) 17(3) European Business Organization Law Review 423.
  • Clayton B, ‘Can a Contractor Recover when Time-barred?’ (2005) International Construction Law Review 341.
  • Corbett E, ‘Adding the Best Bits of FIDIC 2017 to the 1999 Forms’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 29 October 2018) <https://www.corbett.co.uk/cherry-picking-fidic-2017/> accessed 11 December 2021.
  • Corbett E, ‘FIDIC 2017 – First Impressions of the 3-Kilo Suite’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 13 December 2017) <https://www.corbett.co.uk/fidic-2017-first-impressions-of-the-3-kilo-suite-kilo/> accessed 12 December 2021.
  • Davis R O, ‘Advantages of Standard Contract Forms’ (1986) 2(2) Journal of Management in Engineering 79.
  • Di Stefano A, ‘Good Faith in the AS11000: Has the Eagle Landed?’ (2017) 33 Building and Construction Law Journal 13.
  • Dickson B, ‘Unjust Enrichment Claims: A Comparative Overview’ (1995) 54(1) The Cambridge Law Journal 100.
  • Ekşi N, ‘FIDIC Sözleşmelerinde Yer Alan Uyuşmazlık Çözümüne İlişkin 20. Maddeden Kaynaklanan Sorunlar’ in Yeşim M. Atamer, Ece Baş Süzel and Elliott Geisinger (eds), Uluslararası İnşaat Sözleşmeleri ve Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları (On İki Levha 2018).
  • Ekşi N, Milletlerarası Ticaret Hukuku (2nd edn, Beta 2015).
  • Erdem H E, ‘Türk Hukuku ve FIDIC Kapsamında Ek Süre’ (Erdem & Erdem Hukuk Postası, April 2009) <http://www.erdem-erdem.av.tr/yayinlar/hukuk-postasi/turk-hukuku-ve-fidic-kapsaminda-ek-sure/> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Erdem H E, ‘Türk Hukuku ve FIDIC Kapsamında Ek Ücret’ (Erdem & Erdem Hukuk Postası, May 2009) <http://www.erdem-erdem.av.tr/yayinlar/hukuk-postasi/turk-hukuku-ve-fidic-kapsaminda-ek-ucret/> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Erdem M, Özel Hukukta Zamanaşımı (On İki Levha 2010).
  • FIDIC Rainbow Suite ed.2017 - Second edition of the Red, Yellow & Silver Books, FIDIC, 1 March 2018<http://fidic.org/sites/default/files/press%20release_rainbow%20suite_2018_03_1.pdf> accessed 10 December 2021.
  • Furst S, Ramsey V, Hannaford S, Williamson A, Keating D and Uff J, Keating on Construction Contracts (Sweet & Maxwell 2012).
  • Giblin K and Hall I, ‘If it isn’t broken…: A practical guide to the effective use of standard forms of contract’ (K&L Gates Construction Law Blog, 21 February 2019) <https://www.klconstructionlawblog.com/2019/02/if-it-isnt-broken-a-practical-guide-to-the-effective-use-of-standard-forms-of-contract/> accessed 15 December 2021.
  • Glover J, ‘Employer claims under the FIDIC form’ (International Quarterly by Fenwick Elliott LLP, 2015) <http://www.fenwickelliott.co.uk/sites/default/files/issue_015_-_iq_2015.pdf> accessed 24 December 2021.
  • Glover J, ‘FIDIC: an overview – The Latest Developments, Comparisons, Claims and Force Majeure’ (FIDIC, 17 Eylül 2017) <https://bit.ly/3uUBaa4> accessed 15 December 2021.
  • Glover J, ‘Sub-Clause 20.1 – the FIDIC Time Bar under Common and Civil Law’ (Fenwick Elliott, 2015) <https://www.fenwickelliott.com/research-insight/articles-papers/contract-issues/sub-clause-fidic-time-bar> accessed 24 December 2021.
  • Glover J, ‘Time bars in an international context’ (Fenwick Elliott Annual Review 2015/2016, 6 November 2015) <https://www.fenwickelliott.com/research-insight/annual-review/2015/time-bars-international-context> accessed 24 December 2021.
  • Godwin W, International Construction Contracts: A Handbook with commentary on the FIDIC design-build forms (Wiley-Blackwell 2013).
  • Godwin P, Roughton D, Gilmore D and Kratochvilova E, ‘The prevention principle, time at large and extension of time clauses’ (Herbert Smith Construction dispute avoidance newsletter, 21 August 2009) <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=09e90e60-fa47-411b-813d-0e3c6427f836> accessed 24 December 2021.
  • Havutçu A, Tüketicinin Genel İşlem Şartlarına Karşı Korunması (Güncel 2003).
  • Jaeger A.-V. and Hok, G.-S., FIDIC-A Guide for Practitioners (Springer 2010).
  • Jędrzejczyk D, ‘Sub-clause 20.1 of the FIDIC Under Polish Law - Is It an Enforceable Time Bar?’ (K&L Gates Construction Law Blog, 16 March 2018) <https://www.klconstructionlawblog.com/2018/03/sub-clause-20-1-of-the-fidic-under-polish-law-is-it-an-enforceable-time-bar/> accessed 9 December 2021.
  • Jones D, ‘Can Prevention be Cured by Time Bars?’ (2009) 26 International Construction Law Review 57.
  • Kaplan İ, İnşaat Sözleşmeleri Hukuku ve Endüstri Yatırım Sözleşmeleri (Yetkin 2013).
  • Kim S H, Han M and Khalil U, ‘The Application of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods to Manufacturing and Supply Contracts for International Construction Projects’ (2019) International Construction Law Review 352.
  • King C and Ardagh R, ‘Conditions Precedent: Will they bite?’ (Fenwick Elliott, June 2020) <https://www.fenwickelliott.com/research-insight/newsletters/insight/86> accessed 19 December 2021.
  • Kitt G, ‘Construction Claims in the UK’ in Lukas Klee (ed), International Construction Contract Law (2nd edn, John Wiley & Sons 2018).
  • Klee L, International Construction Contract Law (2nd edn, John Wiley & Sons 2018).
  • Kocayusufpaşaoğlu N, Hatemi H, Serozan R, Arpacı A, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Bölüm Birinci Cilt (Filiz 2017).
  • Köksal T, International Construction Law (Adalet 2013).
  • Lal H, ‘The Rise and Rise of Time-Bar Clauses: The Real Issue for Construction Arbitrators’ (2007) International Construction Law Review 118.
  • Lane Patrick M M, ‘The Tension Between the Application of Good Faith and Pacta Sunt Servanda’ (2020) International Construction Law Review 294.
  • Lenz C H, ‘Procedures for Contractors’ and Employers’ Claims and Pitfalls - In Particular under FIDIC Contracts’ in Yeşim M. Atamer, Ece Baş Süzel and Elliott Geisinger (eds), Uluslararası İnşaat Sözleşmeleri ve Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları (On İki Levha 2018).
  • Leszko, M, ‘Notification of Claims - The Deadline and the Effects of its Expiry - Some Considerations on the Basis of the 1999 and 2017 Versions of the FIDIC Conditions of Contract’ (DLA Piper Publications, 1 June 2018) <https://www.dlapiper.com/pl/poland/insights/publications/2018/07/new-fidic-conditions-of-contract-for-construction-polish-perspective/> accessed 9 December 2021.
  • Mae K, ‘Preventing Improper Liability for Delay but not Preventing Disputes: Re-thinking the Implications of the Prevention Principle in Australia and Abroad’ (2019) International Construction Law Review 24.
  • Mellors B, ‘FIDIC 2017’s enhanced contract management provisions’ (Practical Law Construction Blog, May 22, 2019) <http://constructionblog.practicallaw.com/fidic-2017s-enhanced-contract-management-provisions/> accessed 26 December 2021.
  • Moss S, ‘Swiss Law vs. English Law on Contract Interpretation: Is Swiss Law Better Suited to the Realities of International Construction Contracts’ (2015) International Construction Law Review 470.
  • Mulero Clas G, ‘Clause 20: Employer’s and Contractor’s Claims’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 27 January 2018) <https://www.corbett.co.uk/clause-20-employers-and-contractors-claims/> accessed 15 December 2021.
  • Ndekugri I, Chapman P, Smith N and Hughes W, ‘Best Practice in the Training, Appointment, and Remuneration of Members of Dispute Boards for Large Infrastructure Projects’ (2014) 30(2) Journal of Management in Engineering 185.
  • Oğuzman M K, Öz M T, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler Cilt-1 (17th edn, Vedat 2019).
  • O’Reilly M, Civil Engineering Construction Contracts (2nd edn, Thomas Telford Ltd 1999).
  • Park KJ, ‘Claim Notice: When Should the Contractor Notify?’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 24 May 2016) <https://corbett.co.uk/claim-notice-by-when-should-the-contractor-notify-2/> accessed 9 December 2021.
  • Robertson D, ‘When must a contractor give notice of an entitlement under FIDIC’s condition precedent clause?’ (The Practical Law Construction Blog, 17 June 2014) <http://constructionblog.practicallaw.com/when-must-a-contractor-give-notice-of-an-entitlement-under-fidics-condition-precedent-clause/> accessed 28 December 2021.
  • Sawtell D, ‘Enrichment-based Claims for a Quantum Meruit in Construction Disputes’ (2019) International Construction Law Review 101.
  • Schäfer H B and Aksoy H C, ‘Good Faith’ (2015) Encyclopedia of Law and Economics 1.
  • Schneider M E, ‘A Typology of Risk Allocation – The Example of FIDIC Suite of Contracts’ in Yeşim M. Atamer, Ece Baş Süzel and Elliott Geisinger (eds), Uluslararası İnşaat Sözleşmelerinde Beklenmeyen Hal Kavramı (On İki Levha 2020).
  • Schwenzer I and Hachem P, ‘Article 1’ in Ingeborg Schwenzer (ed), Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG) (4th ed., Oxford 2016).
  • Schwenzer I, Ranetunge J and Tafur F, ‘Service Contracts and the CISG’ (2018) 10 The Indian Journal of International Economic Law 170.
  • Seppälä C R, ‘Contractor’s Claims Under the FIDIC Contracts for Major Works’ (2005) 21(4) International Construction Law Review 278.
  • Serozan R, Medeni Hukuk Genel Bölüm (Vedat 2005).
  • Smiley A and Rawal R, ‘Locked behind Time Bars’ (2018) International Construction Law Review 60.
  • Sözen Z, FIDIC Genel Koşullarından Örneklerle İnşaat Sözleşmelerinin Yönetimi (Legal 2015).
  • Steward M R and de Moraes C A, ‘FIDIC Update: Clarity on Notice Provisions and Time Bars’ (K&L Gates Construction Law Blog, 19 May 2014)<https://www.klconstructionlawblog.com/2014/05/fidic-update-clarity-on-notice-provisions-and-time-bars/> accessed 9 Decem- ber 2021.
  • Tekinay S S, Akman S, Burcuoğlu H and Altop A, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (Filiz 1993).
  • The FIDIC Contracts Guide (FIDIC 2000).
  • Thomas D, ‘Time-bars Revisited’ (Construction Law International, December 2014) <https://www.ibanet.org/Article/NewDetail.aspx?ArticleUid=9199af06-e541-4c36-a1a7-a5ad4de00c81#10> accessed 11 December 2021.
  • Tuzcuoğlu T, Avrupa Birliği Normları ve 6098 Sayılı Türk Borçlar Kanunu Hükümleri Işığında Genel İşlem Şartları (Seçkin 2020).
  • Tweeddale A, ‘FIDIC’s clause 20 a common law view’ (Construction Law International, 1 June 2006) <http://corbett.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/FIDIC-Clause-20-a-common-law-view.pdf> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Tweeddale A and Culatto N, ‘Clause 1’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 2016) <http://corbett.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Clause-1-1.pdf > accessed 10 December 2021.
  • Tyson V, ‘Employers Beware’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 16 December 2015) <https://corbett.co.uk/employers-beware/> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Tyson V, ‘FIDIC’s Golden Principles – holding back the tide?’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 10 March 2020) <https://www.corbett.co.uk/fidics-golden-principles-holding-back-the-tide/> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Varley J, ‘Time to change “time at large”?’ (The Practical Law Construction Blog, 27 August 2014) <http://constructionblog.practicallaw.com/time-to-change-time-at-large/> accessed 7 December 2021.
  • Wallace I D, ‘Prevention and Liquidated Damages: A Theory Too Far?’ (2002) 18 Building and Construction Law 82.
  • Wardle N, ‘FIDIC contracts – a preview of what is to come’ (The Practical Law Construction Blog, 13 January 2021) <http://constructionblog.practicallaw.com/fidic-contracts-a-preview-of-what-is-to-come/> accessed 18 December 2021.
  • Warren M, ‘Good Faith: Where Are We At?’ (2010) 34 (1) Melbourne University Law Review 344.
  • Wilson M, ‘The importance of timely and proper notice of a claim under a contract’ (Nuts & Bolts | Construction Law Blog, 22 February 2018) <https://www.greensfelder.com/nuts-bolts-construction-law-blog/importance-of-timely-and-proper-notice-of-claim-under-contract#page=1> accessed 18 December 2021.
  • Yelmen A, Türk Borçlar Kanunu’na Göre Genel İşlem Koşulları (Yetkin 2014).
  • Yılmaz A, Haksız Rekabet Hukukunda Genel İşlem Şartı Kullanımı (Seçkin 2015).

CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES

Year 2022, Volume: 19 Issue: 3, 391 - 448, 15.10.2022

Sinem Özyiğit

Abstract

The FIDIC family of contract templates is leading in the construction industry at this point in time. An essential provision in those templates regards the claim procedure for additional time or money, the first step of which is notification of claims in a timely and duly manner. Non-compliance with notice requirements will otherwise deprive contracting parties of their right to additional time or money. Surprisingly, sources in legal literature regarding such an essential provision are still few and far between when it comes to civil law countries. As such, our main aim in this article is to fill this gap as much as possible. The first chapter will scrape the surface of the FIDIC standard contracts. Then, we will delve into the notice requirements, considering that disputes in the construction sector are circling around failure to comply with the notice requirements. Finally, we will determine the legal arguments available to prevent the strict application of the notice requirements. While doing this analysis, we will draw on the judgments from the civil law and common law systems.

Keywords

Construction Contracts FIDIC Claim Claim Notices

References

  • Akıncı Z, Milletlerarası Özel Hukukta İnşaat Sözleşmeleri (Adalet 1996).
  • Antalya O G, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler Cilt 1 (Legal 2018).
  • Antalya O G and Doğancı E D, ‘Genel İşlem Koşullarında Saydamlık Kuralının, Bunun TBK m. 20 vd.’daki Görünümlerinin ve TTK m. 55 f. 1 f ile TBK m. 20 vd.’nın Birlikte Uygulanabilirliğinin Değerlendirilmesi’ (2018) 24(2) MÜHFHAD 823.
  • Atamer Y M, ‘Genel İşlem Koşulu Mu Bireysel Pazarlıkla Kurulan Sözleşme mi?’ in Çiğdem Kırca (ed), Yeni Türk Borçlar Kanunu ve Yeni Türk Ticaret Kanunu Sempozyumu (Vedat 2013).
  • Atamer Y M, Sözleşme Özgürlüğünün Sınırlandırılması Sorunu Çerçevesinde Genel İşlem Şartlarının Denetlenmesi (2nd edn, Beta 2010).
  • Atamer Y M, Tacirlerin Genel İşlem Şartlarına Karşı Korunması Yolları (İTO 2001).
  • Bailey J, Construction Law (2nd edn, Informa Law from Routledge 2016).
  • Baker E, Mellors B, Chalmers S and Laver A, FIDIC Contracts: Law and Practice (Informa 2013).
  • Bell A, Hall N, ‘Employer Claims under FIDIC: Where Are We Now?’ (Turkish Commercial Law Review, Winter 2016) <http://the-tclr.org/employer-claims-fidic-now/> accessed 15 December 2021.
  • Bremen J, Ammar L B, ‘Contractors’ Claims, Remedies and Reliefs’ (Global Arbitration Review, 12 December 2017) <https://globalarbitrationreview.com/chapter/1145221/contractors-claims-remedies-and-reliefs> accessed 18 December 2021.
  • Budak S A, ‘Türk Eser Sözleşmesi Hukuku Işığında FIDIC Sözleşmeleri’ in Yeşim M. Atamer, Ece Baş Süzel and Elliott Geisinger (eds), Uluslararası İnşaat Sözleşmeleri ve Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları (On İki Levha 2018).
  • Büyüksağiş E, ‘İçerik Denetiminin Müzakere Edilmemiş Sözleşme Hükümleriyle Sınırlanması Üzerine: Mostaza Claro’nun Düşündürdükleri’ (2013) 8 (Special Issue) Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi 675.
  • Büyüksağiş E, ‘Turkish Contract Law Reform: Standard Terms, Unforeseen Circumstances, and Judicial Intervention’ (2016) 17(3) European Business Organization Law Review 423.
  • Clayton B, ‘Can a Contractor Recover when Time-barred?’ (2005) International Construction Law Review 341.
  • Corbett E, ‘Adding the Best Bits of FIDIC 2017 to the 1999 Forms’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 29 October 2018) <https://www.corbett.co.uk/cherry-picking-fidic-2017/> accessed 11 December 2021.
  • Corbett E, ‘FIDIC 2017 – First Impressions of the 3-Kilo Suite’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 13 December 2017) <https://www.corbett.co.uk/fidic-2017-first-impressions-of-the-3-kilo-suite-kilo/> accessed 12 December 2021.
  • Davis R O, ‘Advantages of Standard Contract Forms’ (1986) 2(2) Journal of Management in Engineering 79.
  • Di Stefano A, ‘Good Faith in the AS11000: Has the Eagle Landed?’ (2017) 33 Building and Construction Law Journal 13.
  • Dickson B, ‘Unjust Enrichment Claims: A Comparative Overview’ (1995) 54(1) The Cambridge Law Journal 100.
  • Ekşi N, ‘FIDIC Sözleşmelerinde Yer Alan Uyuşmazlık Çözümüne İlişkin 20. Maddeden Kaynaklanan Sorunlar’ in Yeşim M. Atamer, Ece Baş Süzel and Elliott Geisinger (eds), Uluslararası İnşaat Sözleşmeleri ve Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları (On İki Levha 2018).
  • Ekşi N, Milletlerarası Ticaret Hukuku (2nd edn, Beta 2015).
  • Erdem H E, ‘Türk Hukuku ve FIDIC Kapsamında Ek Süre’ (Erdem & Erdem Hukuk Postası, April 2009) <http://www.erdem-erdem.av.tr/yayinlar/hukuk-postasi/turk-hukuku-ve-fidic-kapsaminda-ek-sure/> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Erdem H E, ‘Türk Hukuku ve FIDIC Kapsamında Ek Ücret’ (Erdem & Erdem Hukuk Postası, May 2009) <http://www.erdem-erdem.av.tr/yayinlar/hukuk-postasi/turk-hukuku-ve-fidic-kapsaminda-ek-ucret/> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Erdem M, Özel Hukukta Zamanaşımı (On İki Levha 2010).
  • FIDIC Rainbow Suite ed.2017 - Second edition of the Red, Yellow & Silver Books, FIDIC, 1 March 2018<http://fidic.org/sites/default/files/press%20release_rainbow%20suite_2018_03_1.pdf> accessed 10 December 2021.
  • Furst S, Ramsey V, Hannaford S, Williamson A, Keating D and Uff J, Keating on Construction Contracts (Sweet & Maxwell 2012).
  • Giblin K and Hall I, ‘If it isn’t broken…: A practical guide to the effective use of standard forms of contract’ (K&L Gates Construction Law Blog, 21 February 2019) <https://www.klconstructionlawblog.com/2019/02/if-it-isnt-broken-a-practical-guide-to-the-effective-use-of-standard-forms-of-contract/> accessed 15 December 2021.
  • Glover J, ‘Employer claims under the FIDIC form’ (International Quarterly by Fenwick Elliott LLP, 2015) <http://www.fenwickelliott.co.uk/sites/default/files/issue_015_-_iq_2015.pdf> accessed 24 December 2021.
  • Glover J, ‘FIDIC: an overview – The Latest Developments, Comparisons, Claims and Force Majeure’ (FIDIC, 17 Eylül 2017) <https://bit.ly/3uUBaa4> accessed 15 December 2021.
  • Glover J, ‘Sub-Clause 20.1 – the FIDIC Time Bar under Common and Civil Law’ (Fenwick Elliott, 2015) <https://www.fenwickelliott.com/research-insight/articles-papers/contract-issues/sub-clause-fidic-time-bar> accessed 24 December 2021.
  • Glover J, ‘Time bars in an international context’ (Fenwick Elliott Annual Review 2015/2016, 6 November 2015) <https://www.fenwickelliott.com/research-insight/annual-review/2015/time-bars-international-context> accessed 24 December 2021.
  • Godwin W, International Construction Contracts: A Handbook with commentary on the FIDIC design-build forms (Wiley-Blackwell 2013).
  • Godwin P, Roughton D, Gilmore D and Kratochvilova E, ‘The prevention principle, time at large and extension of time clauses’ (Herbert Smith Construction dispute avoidance newsletter, 21 August 2009) <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=09e90e60-fa47-411b-813d-0e3c6427f836> accessed 24 December 2021.
  • Havutçu A, Tüketicinin Genel İşlem Şartlarına Karşı Korunması (Güncel 2003).
  • Jaeger A.-V. and Hok, G.-S., FIDIC-A Guide for Practitioners (Springer 2010).
  • Jędrzejczyk D, ‘Sub-clause 20.1 of the FIDIC Under Polish Law - Is It an Enforceable Time Bar?’ (K&L Gates Construction Law Blog, 16 March 2018) <https://www.klconstructionlawblog.com/2018/03/sub-clause-20-1-of-the-fidic-under-polish-law-is-it-an-enforceable-time-bar/> accessed 9 December 2021.
  • Jones D, ‘Can Prevention be Cured by Time Bars?’ (2009) 26 International Construction Law Review 57.
  • Kaplan İ, İnşaat Sözleşmeleri Hukuku ve Endüstri Yatırım Sözleşmeleri (Yetkin 2013).
  • Kim S H, Han M and Khalil U, ‘The Application of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods to Manufacturing and Supply Contracts for International Construction Projects’ (2019) International Construction Law Review 352.
  • King C and Ardagh R, ‘Conditions Precedent: Will they bite?’ (Fenwick Elliott, June 2020) <https://www.fenwickelliott.com/research-insight/newsletters/insight/86> accessed 19 December 2021.
  • Kitt G, ‘Construction Claims in the UK’ in Lukas Klee (ed), International Construction Contract Law (2nd edn, John Wiley & Sons 2018).
  • Klee L, International Construction Contract Law (2nd edn, John Wiley & Sons 2018).
  • Kocayusufpaşaoğlu N, Hatemi H, Serozan R, Arpacı A, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Bölüm Birinci Cilt (Filiz 2017).
  • Köksal T, International Construction Law (Adalet 2013).
  • Lal H, ‘The Rise and Rise of Time-Bar Clauses: The Real Issue for Construction Arbitrators’ (2007) International Construction Law Review 118.
  • Lane Patrick M M, ‘The Tension Between the Application of Good Faith and Pacta Sunt Servanda’ (2020) International Construction Law Review 294.
  • Lenz C H, ‘Procedures for Contractors’ and Employers’ Claims and Pitfalls - In Particular under FIDIC Contracts’ in Yeşim M. Atamer, Ece Baş Süzel and Elliott Geisinger (eds), Uluslararası İnşaat Sözleşmeleri ve Uyuşmazlık Çözüm Yolları (On İki Levha 2018).
  • Leszko, M, ‘Notification of Claims - The Deadline and the Effects of its Expiry - Some Considerations on the Basis of the 1999 and 2017 Versions of the FIDIC Conditions of Contract’ (DLA Piper Publications, 1 June 2018) <https://www.dlapiper.com/pl/poland/insights/publications/2018/07/new-fidic-conditions-of-contract-for-construction-polish-perspective/> accessed 9 December 2021.
  • Mae K, ‘Preventing Improper Liability for Delay but not Preventing Disputes: Re-thinking the Implications of the Prevention Principle in Australia and Abroad’ (2019) International Construction Law Review 24.
  • Mellors B, ‘FIDIC 2017’s enhanced contract management provisions’ (Practical Law Construction Blog, May 22, 2019) <http://constructionblog.practicallaw.com/fidic-2017s-enhanced-contract-management-provisions/> accessed 26 December 2021.
  • Moss S, ‘Swiss Law vs. English Law on Contract Interpretation: Is Swiss Law Better Suited to the Realities of International Construction Contracts’ (2015) International Construction Law Review 470.
  • Mulero Clas G, ‘Clause 20: Employer’s and Contractor’s Claims’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 27 January 2018) <https://www.corbett.co.uk/clause-20-employers-and-contractors-claims/> accessed 15 December 2021.
  • Ndekugri I, Chapman P, Smith N and Hughes W, ‘Best Practice in the Training, Appointment, and Remuneration of Members of Dispute Boards for Large Infrastructure Projects’ (2014) 30(2) Journal of Management in Engineering 185.
  • Oğuzman M K, Öz M T, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler Cilt-1 (17th edn, Vedat 2019).
  • O’Reilly M, Civil Engineering Construction Contracts (2nd edn, Thomas Telford Ltd 1999).
  • Park KJ, ‘Claim Notice: When Should the Contractor Notify?’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 24 May 2016) <https://corbett.co.uk/claim-notice-by-when-should-the-contractor-notify-2/> accessed 9 December 2021.
  • Robertson D, ‘When must a contractor give notice of an entitlement under FIDIC’s condition precedent clause?’ (The Practical Law Construction Blog, 17 June 2014) <http://constructionblog.practicallaw.com/when-must-a-contractor-give-notice-of-an-entitlement-under-fidics-condition-precedent-clause/> accessed 28 December 2021.
  • Sawtell D, ‘Enrichment-based Claims for a Quantum Meruit in Construction Disputes’ (2019) International Construction Law Review 101.
  • Schäfer H B and Aksoy H C, ‘Good Faith’ (2015) Encyclopedia of Law and Economics 1.
  • Schneider M E, ‘A Typology of Risk Allocation – The Example of FIDIC Suite of Contracts’ in Yeşim M. Atamer, Ece Baş Süzel and Elliott Geisinger (eds), Uluslararası İnşaat Sözleşmelerinde Beklenmeyen Hal Kavramı (On İki Levha 2020).
  • Schwenzer I and Hachem P, ‘Article 1’ in Ingeborg Schwenzer (ed), Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG) (4th ed., Oxford 2016).
  • Schwenzer I, Ranetunge J and Tafur F, ‘Service Contracts and the CISG’ (2018) 10 The Indian Journal of International Economic Law 170.
  • Seppälä C R, ‘Contractor’s Claims Under the FIDIC Contracts for Major Works’ (2005) 21(4) International Construction Law Review 278.
  • Serozan R, Medeni Hukuk Genel Bölüm (Vedat 2005).
  • Smiley A and Rawal R, ‘Locked behind Time Bars’ (2018) International Construction Law Review 60.
  • Sözen Z, FIDIC Genel Koşullarından Örneklerle İnşaat Sözleşmelerinin Yönetimi (Legal 2015).
  • Steward M R and de Moraes C A, ‘FIDIC Update: Clarity on Notice Provisions and Time Bars’ (K&L Gates Construction Law Blog, 19 May 2014)<https://www.klconstructionlawblog.com/2014/05/fidic-update-clarity-on-notice-provisions-and-time-bars/> accessed 9 Decem- ber 2021.
  • Tekinay S S, Akman S, Burcuoğlu H and Altop A, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (Filiz 1993).
  • The FIDIC Contracts Guide (FIDIC 2000).
  • Thomas D, ‘Time-bars Revisited’ (Construction Law International, December 2014) <https://www.ibanet.org/Article/NewDetail.aspx?ArticleUid=9199af06-e541-4c36-a1a7-a5ad4de00c81#10> accessed 11 December 2021.
  • Tuzcuoğlu T, Avrupa Birliği Normları ve 6098 Sayılı Türk Borçlar Kanunu Hükümleri Işığında Genel İşlem Şartları (Seçkin 2020).
  • Tweeddale A, ‘FIDIC’s clause 20 a common law view’ (Construction Law International, 1 June 2006) <http://corbett.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/FIDIC-Clause-20-a-common-law-view.pdf> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Tweeddale A and Culatto N, ‘Clause 1’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 2016) <http://corbett.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Clause-1-1.pdf > accessed 10 December 2021.
  • Tyson V, ‘Employers Beware’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 16 December 2015) <https://corbett.co.uk/employers-beware/> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Tyson V, ‘FIDIC’s Golden Principles – holding back the tide?’ (Corbett & Co. Knowledge Hub, 10 March 2020) <https://www.corbett.co.uk/fidics-golden-principles-holding-back-the-tide/> accessed 1 December 2021.
  • Varley J, ‘Time to change “time at large”?’ (The Practical Law Construction Blog, 27 August 2014) <http://constructionblog.practicallaw.com/time-to-change-time-at-large/> accessed 7 December 2021.
  • Wallace I D, ‘Prevention and Liquidated Damages: A Theory Too Far?’ (2002) 18 Building and Construction Law 82.
  • Wardle N, ‘FIDIC contracts – a preview of what is to come’ (The Practical Law Construction Blog, 13 January 2021) <http://constructionblog.practicallaw.com/fidic-contracts-a-preview-of-what-is-to-come/> accessed 18 December 2021.
  • Warren M, ‘Good Faith: Where Are We At?’ (2010) 34 (1) Melbourne University Law Review 344.
  • Wilson M, ‘The importance of timely and proper notice of a claim under a contract’ (Nuts & Bolts | Construction Law Blog, 22 February 2018) <https://www.greensfelder.com/nuts-bolts-construction-law-blog/importance-of-timely-and-proper-notice-of-claim-under-contract#page=1> accessed 18 December 2021.
  • Yelmen A, Türk Borçlar Kanunu’na Göre Genel İşlem Koşulları (Yetkin 2014).
  • Yılmaz A, Haksız Rekabet Hukukunda Genel İşlem Şartı Kullanımı (Seçkin 2015).
There are 82 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Law in Context
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Sinem Özyiğit 0000-0003-4907-0467

Publication Date October 15, 2022
Submission Date January 17, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 19 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Özyiğit, S. (2022). CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(3), 391-448.
AMA Özyiğit S. CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. October 2022;19(3):391-448.
Chicago Özyiğit, Sinem. “CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES”. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 19, no. 3 (October 2022): 391-448.
EndNote Özyiğit S (October 1, 2022) CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 19 3 391–448.
IEEE S. Özyiğit, “CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES”, Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 391–448, 2022.
ISNAD Özyiğit, Sinem. “CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES”. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 19/3 (October 2022), 391-448.
JAMA Özyiğit S. CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. 2022;19:391–448.
MLA Özyiğit, Sinem. “CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES”. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 19, no. 3, 2022, pp. 391-48.
Vancouver Özyiğit S. CLAIM NOTICES UNDER THE FIDIC CONTRACTS: A COMPARISON OF THE CIVIL LAW AND COMMON LAW PERSPECTIVES. Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. 2022;19(3):391-448.
 Download Cover Image