1996 TARİHLİ İNGİLİZ TAHKİM KANUNUNDA YAPILAN ÖNEMLİ DEĞİŞİKLİKLERE İLİŞKİN BAZI TESPİTLER

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 84 Sayı: 1, 475 - 513, 27.02.2026

Didem Kayalı

https://doi.org/10.30915/abd.1838930

https://izlik.org/JA66NM49EC

Öz

Tahkim hukuku, İngiltere’de hem mahkeme kararları hem de kanuni düzenlemeler vasıtasıyla yüzyıllardır gelişen bir alandır. Özellikle 1996 tarihli Tahkim Kanunu ile getirilen ve mahkemelerin yetkisini sınırlandıran tahkim yanlısı yaklaşım sayesinde Londra da milletlerarası tahkim uygulamasında tahkim yeri olarak yıllardır liderliğini korumaktadır. Tahkim yeri tercih edilirken o yerin tahkim kanununun tahkime yaklaşımı şüphesiz çok önemlidir. 1996 tarihli Tahkim Kanununda 2025 yılında yapılan değişikliğin amacı da yaklaşık otuz yıldır uygulanmakta olan Kanunun gözden geçirilerek İngiltere’nin milletlerarası tahkim alanındaki lider konumunu koruyabilmek için ihtiyaç duyulan iyileştirmelerin yapılmasıdır. Çalışmamızda da İngiliz Tahkim Kanununda yapılan temel değişiklikler ile hazırlıklar sırasında tartışılan ancak değişiklik kapsamına alınmayan önemli konular incelenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İngiliz Tahkim Kanunu , Milletlerarası Tahkim , Tahkim Yeri , Tahkim Anlaşması , Bildirim Yükümlülüğü

Some Remarks on the Significant Amendments in the English Arbitration Act 1996

https://izlik.org/JA66NM49EC

Öz

Arbitration law is a field that has developed over centuries in England through both court decisions and statutory regulations. Thanks to the arbitration-friendly approach introduced by the Arbitration Act 1996, which limits the jurisdiction of the courts, London has maintained its leadership as a seat of arbitration in international arbitration practice for years. When choosing the seat of arbitration, the approach of that seat’s arbitration law to arbitration is undoubtedly very important. The purpose of the 2025 amendments in the 1996 Arbitration Act is to review the Act, which has been in force for approximately thirty years, and make the improvements necessary to maintain the England’s leading position in the field of international arbitration. Our study examines the fundamental changes made in the English Arbitration Act, as well as important issues that were discussed during the preparatory stages but were not included in the scope of the amendments.

Anahtar Kelimeler

English Arbitration Act , International Arbitration , Seat of Arbitration , Arbitration Agreement , Duty of Disclosure

Kaynakça

• Akıncı, Ziya. Milletlerarası Tahkim. Vedat Kitapçılık, B. 7, 2025.
• Ambrose, Hannah, Kantor, Liz, Naish, Vnessa ve Frost, Peter. “Can We End Discrimination in Arbitration?”. Inside Arbitration, no. 16 (2023): 11-14. https://marketing.hsfkramer.com/ 20/29354/landing-pages/herbert-smith-freehills---inside-arbitration---edition-16.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2025).
• Barrington, Louise ve Rana, Rashda. “Arbitral Women/TDM Special Issue on ‘Dealing with Diversity in International Arbitration’ – Editorial”. Transnational Dispute Management 4, (2015). https://www.transnational-dispute-management.com/article.asp?key=2233 (Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2025).
• Born, Gary. International Commercial Arbitration. Kluwer Law International, 2009.
• Burn, George ve Clark, Victoria. “The English Arbitration Act 2025: State of the art or a missed opportunity?”. Belgian Review of Arbitration, no. 1 (2025): 281-293.
• Cottin, Antoine. “Reform of French Arbitration Law: Proposals, Controversies and a (Swift) Way Forward”. https://legalblogs.wolterskluwer.com/arbitration-blog/reform-of-french-arbitration-law-proposals-controversies-and-a-swift-way-forward/ (Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2025).
• Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. “The Commercial Court Report 2023-2024”. February 2025, https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/24.295_JO_Commercial_Court_Report _23-24_WEB.pdf (25.11.2025).
• Doudko, Artem ve Elliston, Geoerge. “’Vive L’évotrellion!’ – A Commentary on The New Arbitration Law in England and Wales – The Arbitration Act 2025”. Romanian Arbitration Journal 19, no. 2 (2025): 66-78.
• Erten, Rifat. Milletlerarası Ticarî Tahkim Hukukunda Geçici Hukukî Koruma Önlemleri. Adalet Yayınevi, 2010.
• Freeman, James ve Tan, Goldwin. “The Treaty Exception in The English Arbitration Act 2025: Should There Be A Default Law Applicable to A Treaty-Based Arbitration Agreement?”. ASA Bulletin 43, no. 2 (2025): 290-316.
• Gerbay, Rémy. “Chapter 4: The London Court of International Arbitration”. In Arbitration in England, edited by Julian D. M. Lew, Harris Bor, Gregory Fullelove, Joanne Greenaway. Kluwer Law International, 2013.
• Gicquello, Myriam. “Reviewing the Arbitration Act 1996: A Difficult Exercise?”. Amicus Curiae 4, no. 2 (2023): 391-411.
• Goodman, Ronald E.M. “UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration: Divergent Approaches in England and Scotland – A Question of Appeal?”. International Business Lawyer 18, no. 6 (1990): 250-254.
• Gültutan, Doğan. “The UK Law Commission’s Reforms Proposed to the English Arbitration Act 1996: Bonum, Malum Et Turpe”. Public and Private International Law Bulletin 44, no. 1 (2024): 197-219.
• ICC. “Dispute Resolution 2024 Statistics”. https://iccwbo.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/06/2024-Statistics_ICC_Dispute-Resolution.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2025).
• Kayalı, Didem. Milletlerarası Ticari Tahkimde Hakemlerin Bağımsızlığı ve Tarafsızlığı. Seçkin Yayıncılık, 2015. Law Commission. “Review of the Arbitration Act 1996: Final Report and Bill”. 5 September 2023, https://lawcom.gov.uk/project/review-of-the-arbitration-act-1996/ (Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2025).
• LCIA. “Annual Casework Report 2024”. https://www.lcia.org/News/lcias-2024-annual-casework-report.aspx (Erişim tarihi: 1 Aralık 2025).
• Lew, Julian D.M. ve Melissa Holm. “Chapter 1: Development of the Arbitral System in England”. In Arbitration in England, edited by Julian D. M. Lew, Harris Bor, Gregory Fullelove, Joanne Greenaway. Kluwer Law International, 2013.
• Lew, Julian D.M., Mistelis, Loukas A. ve Kröll, Stefan M. Comparative International Commercial Arbitration. Kluwer Law International, 2003.
• Luttrell, Sam. Bias Challenges in International Arbitration: The Need for a Real Danger Test. Kluwer Law International, 2009.
• Paulsson, Jan. “Arbitration-Friendliness: Promises of Principle end Realities of Practice”. Arbitration International 23, no. 3 (2007): 477-497.
• Rana, Faisal Ali. “Arbitration Act 1996 and English Arbitration Reform Bill: A Critical Analysis of Sections 30, 32 and 67 of Arbitration Act 1996”. City Law Review 7, (2025): 13-26.
• Rogers, Catherine A. “The Ethics of International Arbitrators”. Bocconi Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2007-01, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1081436 (Erişim tarihi: 29 Ekim 2025).
• Ryan, David ve Dharmananda, Kanaga. “Summary Disposal in Arbitration: Still Fair or Agreed to be Fair”. Journal of International Arbitration 35, no. 1 (2018): 31-38.
• Saville, Mark Oliver. “Departmental Advisory Committee on Arbitration Law 1996 Report on the Arbitration Bill”. Arbitration International 13, no. 3 (1997): 276-316.
• School of International Arbitration. “2010 International Arbitraiton Survey – Choices in International Arbitration”. https://www.qmul.ac.uk/arbitration/media/arbitration/docs/2010_ InternationalArbitrationSurveyReport.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 28 Kasım 2025).
• School of International Arbitration, “2015 International Arbitration Survey – Improvements and Innovations in International Arbitration”. https://www.qmul.ac.uk/arbitration/media/ arbitration/docs/2015_International_ Arbitration_Survey.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 28 Kasım 2025)
• School of International Arbitration. “2025 International Arbitration Survey – Tha Path Forward: Realities and Opportunities in Arbitration”. https://www.qmul.ac.uk/arbitration/ media/arbitration/docs/White-Case-QMUL-2025-International-Arbitration-Survey-report.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 28 Kasım 2025).
• Scogings, Eleanor. “The English Arbitration Act 2025: What Does This Mean for LCIA Arbitration?”. Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 18 March 2025, https://legalblogs.wolterskluwer.com/arbitration-blog/the-english-arbitration-act-2025-what-does-this-mean-for-lcia-arbitration/ (Erişim tarihi: 29 Ekim 2025).
• Tamblyn, Nathan. “Arbitrator Immunity and Liability for Court Costs”. Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management 88, no. 2 (2022): 225-239.
• Teomete Yalabık, Fulya. “The Impact of the Seat of Arbitration on Judicial-Inference: Do Sections 67, 68 and 69 of the English Arbitration Act 1996 regarding Challenges of Awards Make London An Attractive Hub?”. Annales de la Faculté de Droit d’Istanbul 70, (2021): 253-272.
• Uyanık, M. Ece. Tahkim Yargılamasında Acil Durum Hakemi. Seçkin Yayıncılık, 2020.
• Winkler, Matteo M. ve Schinazi, Mikaël. “Chapter 24: Diversity and Inclusiveness in International Arbitration”. In Arbitration Beyond Borders – Essays in Memory of Guillermo Aguilar Álvarez, edited by Nigel Blackaby KC and W. Michael Reisman. Kluwer Law International, 2023.
• Wolfson, David ve Charlwood, Susanna. “Chapter 25: Challenges to Arbitral Awards”. In Arbitration in England, edited by Julian D. M. Lew, Harris Bor, Gregory Fullelove, Joanne Greenaway. Kluwer Law International, 2013.