FORUM NON CONVENIENS DOKTRİNİ VE ULUSLARARASI PARALEL DAVALAR

Her devlet, kendi mahkemelerinin milletlerarası yetkisini belirleme hususunda serbesttir. Bunun bir sonucu olarak, yabancılık unsuru taşıyan bir uyuşmazlık bakımından birden çok ülke mahkemesinin yetkili olması mümkündür. Forum non conveniens doktrininin uygulama alanı bulabilmesi için, aynı dava bakımından birden çok ülke mahkemesinin milletlerarası yetkiyi haiz olması, diğer bir deyişle, söz konusu uyuşmazlık bakımından farklı devlet mahkemeleri arasında uluslararası yetki çatışması olması gerekmektedir. Çünkü bu doktrinin esas tartışma konusu, her biri yetkili bu ülke mahkemelerinden hangisinde davanın görülmesinin en uygun olacağıdır. Forum non conveniens doktrinine benzer olarak, uluslararası paralel davaların ortaya çıkışı da yabancılık unsuru içeren ve birden fazla ülke ile ilişkisi olan uyuşmazlıklarda, farklı ülke mahkemelerinin kendilerini bu uyuşmazlığın çözümü bakımından yetkili görmesi sonucu gerçekleşmiştir. İşte bu nedenle, forum non conveniens ile paralel davalar konuları birbiriyle çok yakından ilişkili ve bağlantılı konulardır. Aynı davanın yabancı bir ülke mahkemesi önünde derdest olması, mahkemenin forum non conveniens değerlendirmesi sırasında dikkate alacağı hususlardan birisidir. Öte yandan bazı milletlerarası metinlerde, forum non conveniens ve yabancı derdestlik meselelerinin iç içe geçerek düzenleme altına alındığı görülmüştür.

THE DOCTRINE OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS AND INTERNATIONAL PARALLEL LITIGATION

Every state determines international jurisdiction of its own courts. As a result of this principle, it is possible that multiple competent courts in different countries have jurisdiction over the same dispute. This leads to the cases of overlapping jurisdiction. The doctrine of forum non conveniens comes into question when more than one court simultaneously have jurisdiction over the same dispute. The main argument of this doctrine is based on the assessment that which one of these competent courts would be more appropriate to resolve the dispute. Similar to the doctrine of forum non conveniens, the problem of international parallel litigation also arises from the issue of multiple competent courts in relation to the same dispute. Therefore, the doctrine of forum non conveniens and international parallel litigation are closely related issues. Parallel litigation pending in another country in relation to the same dispute is one of the elements that the court would take into consideration while evaluating forum non conveniens. Additionally, the doctrine of forum non conveniens and parallel litigation are regulated in some international documents in the way that they mutually affect each other.

PDF

___

Akıncı, Ziya: Milletlerarası Usul Hukukunda Yetki Sözleşmesine Dayanan Yabancı Derdestlik, Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara, 2002.
Arzandeh, Ardavan: “Should the Spiliada Test be Revised?”, Journal of Private International Law, Cilt: 10, Sayı: 1, 2014, ss. 89-112.
Barma, Aarif/Elvin, David: “Forum Non Conveniens: Where Do We Go from Here?”, The Law Quarterly Review, Cilt: 101, Sayı: 1, 1985, ss. 48-67.
Barrett Jr., Edward L.: “The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens”, California Law Review, Cilt: 35, Sayı: 3, 1947, ss. 380-422.
Bayraktaroğlu Özçelik, Gülüm: Milletlerarası Usul Hukukunda Paralel Davalar, Yetkin Yayınları, Ankara, 2016.
Beaumont, Paul: “Great Britain”, Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law, Ed. J. J. Fawcett, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995, ss. 207- 233.
Bell, Andrew S.: Forum Shopping and Venue in Transnational Litigation, Oxford University Press, New York, 2003.
Blair, Paxton: “The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens in Anglo-American Law”, Columbia Law Review, Cilt: 29, Sayı: 1, 1929, ss. 1-34.
Born, Gary B./Rutledge, Peter B.: International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, Fifth Edition, Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, New York, 2011.
Bookman, Pamela K.: “Litigation Isolationism”, Stanford Law Review, Cilt: 67, Sayı:5, 2015, ss. 1081-1144.
Brand, Ronald A.: “Challenges to Forum Non Conveniens”, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Cilt: 45, Sayı: 4, 2013, ss. 1003-1035.
Brand, Ronald A.: “Comperative Forum Non Conveniens and the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Judgments”, Texas International Law Journal, Cilt: 37, Sayı: 3, 2002, (Comperative), ss. 467-498.
Brand, Ronald A./Jablonski, Scott R.: Forum Non Conveniens: History, Global Practice and Future Under the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, Oxford University Press, New York, 2007.
Burke, John J. A.: “Foreclosure of the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens under the Brussels I Regulation: Advantges and Disadvantages”, The European Legal Forum, Sayı: 3-2008, 2008, ss. 121-126.
Calamita, N. Jansen: “Rethinking Comity: Towards a Coherent Treatment of International Parallel Proceedings”, Journal of International Law, Cilt: 27, Sayı: 3, 2006, ss. 601-680.
Childress III, Donald Earl: “Forum Conveniens: The Search for a Convenient Forum in Transnational Cases”, Virginia Journal of International Law Digest, Cilt: 53, Sayı: 1, 2012, ss. 157-179.
Clarkson, C.M.V./Hill, Jonathan: The Conflict of Laws, Fourth Edition, Oxford University Press, New York, 2011.
Çelikel, Aysel/Erdem, B. Bahadır: Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk, Beta, İstanbul, 2016.
Dardağan, Esra: Milletlerarası Usul Hukukunda “Aşkın Yetki” Kavramı, Siyasal Kitabevi, Ankara, 2005.
Del Duca, Louis F./Zaphiriou, George A.: “United States of America”, Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law, Ed. J. J. Fawcett, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995, ss. 401-428.
Dieterich, Katherine R.: “Forum Non Conveniens and the Warsaw Convention: Leaving the Turbulence Behind?”, Hofstra Law Review, Cilt: 33, Sayı: 4, 2005, ss. 1507-1542.
Dorward, Daniel J.: “Forum Non Conveniens Doctrine and the Judicial Protection of Multinational Corporations from Forum Shopping Plaintiffs”, Journal of International Law, Cilt: 19, Sayı: 1, 2014, ss. 141-168.
Ekşi, Nuray: “Milletlerarası Tahkimde Güncel İki Sorun: Hakemlerce Anti-Suit Injunction ve Punitive Tazminat Kararı Verilmesi”, Uluslararası Ticaret ve Tahkim Hukuku Dergisi, Cilt:3, Sayı: 2, 2014, ss. 3-36.
Ekşi, Nuray: Türk Mahkemelerinin Milletlerarası Yetkisi, 2. Bası, Beta, İstanbul, 2000, (Yetki).
Elçin, Doğa: “Forum Non Conveniens Doktrini”, Prof. Dr. İlhan Unat’a Armağan, Mülkiyeliler Birliği Yayın No: 2012/1, Ankara, 2012, ss. 311- 329.
Fawcett, James J.: “General Report”, Declining Jurisdiction in Private International Law, Ed. J. J. Fawcett, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995, ss. 1-70.
Fawcett, James J./Carruthers, Janeen M./North, Peter: Cheshire, North & Fawcett: Private International Law, Fourteenth Edition, Oxford University Press, New York, 2008.
George, James P.: “International Parallel Litigation – A Survey of Current Conventions and Model Laws”, Texas International Law Journal, Cilt: 37, Sayı: 3, 2002, ss. 499-540.
Greenberg, Mark D.: “The Appropriate Source of Law for Forum Non Conveniens Decisions in International Cases: A Proposal fort he Development of Federal Common Law”, International Tax & Business Lawyer, Cilt: 4, 1986, ss. 155-197.
Janis, M. W.: “The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens and The Bhopal Case”, Netherlands International Law Review, Cilt: 32, Sayı: 2, 1987, ss. 192-204.
Karayanni, Michael: Forum Non Conveniens in the Modern Age: A Comparative and Methodological Analysis of Anglo-American Law, Transnational Publishers, New York, 2004.
Kruger, Thalia: Civil Jurisdiction Rules of the EU and Their Impact on Third States, Oxford University Press, New York, 2008.
Manolis, F. Mikis/Vermette, Nathaly J./Hungerford, Robert F.: “The Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens: Canada and the United States Compared”, Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel Quarterly, Cilt: 60, Sayı:1, Güz, 2009, ss. 3-34.
of Mapesbury, Lord Collins ve diğerleri (Ed.): Dicey, Morris and Collins on The Conflict of Laws, Fifteenth Edition, Cilt: 1, Sweet & Maxwell, Londra, 2012.
McClean, David: “The Right to a Fair Trial, Forum Non Conveniens and the Limits of the Possible”, A Commitment to Private International Law: Essays in Honour of Hans van Loon, Intersentia Publishing, Cambridge, 2013, ss. 357-369.
McLachlan, Campbell: Lis Pendens in International Litigation, Martinus Nijhoff 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 Experience”, Private Law in the International Arena: from National Conflict Rules Towards Harmonization and Unification - Liber Amicorum Kurt Siehr, Ed. Jürgen Basedow, Isaak Meier, Anton K. Schnyder, Talia Einhorn ve Daniel Girsberger, T.M.C. Asser Press, Lahey, 2000.
Özkan, Işıl/Tütüncübaşı, Uğur: Uluslararası Usul Hukuku, Adalet Yayınevi, Ankara, 2017.
Petsche, Markus A.: “A Critique of the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens”, Ekim 2011, http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009& context=markus_petsche, (Erişim tarihi: 09.12.2018).
Rosato, Jennifer L.: “Restoring Justice to the Doctrince of Forum Non Conveniens for Foreign Plaintiffs Who Sue U.S. Corporations in the Federal Courts”, Journal of Comperative Business and Capital Market Law, Cilt: 8, 1986, ss. 169-196.
Sakmar, Atâ: “Le Nouveau Droit International Privé Turc”, Académie de Droit International, Recueil des Cours, Cilt: 4, No: 223, 1990, ss. 303-416.
Schulze, H. Christian A. W.: “Forum Non Conveniens in Comperative Private International Law”, The Sourth African Law Journal, Cilt: 118, Sayı: 4, 2001, ss. 812-830.
Silberman, Linda: “A Proposed Lis Pendens Rule for Courts in the United States: The International Judgments Project of the American Law Institute”, Intercontinental Cooperation Through Private International Law: Essays in Memory of Peter E. Nygh, Ed. Talia Einhorn ve Kurt Siehr, T.M.C. Asser Press, Lahey, 2004, ss. 341-356.
Stuckelberg, Martine: “Lis Pendens and Forum Non Conveniens at the Hague Conference: The Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Brooklyn Journal of International Law, Cilt: 26, Sayı: 3, 2001, ss. 949-981.
Şanlı, Cemal/Esen, Emre/Ataman-Figanmeşe, İnci: Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk, Vedat Kitapçılık, İstanbul, 2014.
Tang, Zheng Sophia: “Conflicts of Jurisdiction and Party Autonomy in Europe”, Netherlands International Law Review, Cilt: 59, Sayı: 3, 2012, ss. 321-359.
Tate, Christopher: “American Forum Non Conveniens in the Light of the Hague Convention on Choice-of-Court Agreements”, University of Pittsburgh Law Review, Cilt: 69, Sayı: 1, 2007, ss. 165-187.
Whytock, Christopher A./Robertson, Cassandra Burke: “Forum Non Conveniens and the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, Columbia Law Review, Cilt: 111, Sayı: 7, 2011, ss. 1444-1521.
Yeşilova, Bilgehan: Milletlerarası Ticari Tahkimde Nihai Karardan Önce Mahkemelerin Yardımı ve Denetimi, Güncel Hukuk Yayınları, İzmir, 2008.
Zhenjie, Hu: “Forum Non Conveniens: An Unjustified Doctrine”, Netherlands International Law Review, Cilt: 48, Sayı: 2, 2001, ss. 143-169.
Hague Conference on Private International Law, Commission II, Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, Nineteenth Session, Summary of the Outcome of the Discussion in Commission II of the First Part of the Diplomatic Conference 6-20 June 2001, Interim Text, https://assets.hcch.net/ docs/e172ab52-e2de-4e40-9051-11aee7c7be67.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 27.12.2018)
İngiltere Yüksek Mahkemeler Kanunu (Senior Courts Act), 1981, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/54/contents, (Erişim tarihi: 27.12.2018).
Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters adopted by the Special Commission and Report by Peter Nygh and Fausto Pocar, Preliminary Document No 11 of August 2000, (Preliminary Draft and Report), https://assets.hcch.net/upload/wop/ jdgmpd11.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 27.12.2018).
The Leuven/London Principles on Declining and Referring Jurisdiction in Civil and Commercial Matters, 69th Conference of the International Law Association, Resolution No. 1/2000, International Civil and Commercial Litigation, 2000.
The principles for determining when the use of the doctrine of forum non conveniens and anti-suit injunctions is appropriate, Institut de Droit International, Session de Bruges - 2003, Second Commission, Resolution, (Bruges Resolution), http://www.idi-iil.org/app/uploads/2017/06/2003_bru_ 01_en.pdf, (Erişim tarihi: 27.12.2018)
Third Interim Report: Declining and Referring Jurisdiction in International Litigation, International Law Association Comitee on International Civil and Commercial Litigation, London Conference, 2000, (London Report).