___

Abdulla Z., The Arbitration Agreement, Chapter 2, International Arbitration in Switzerland, A Handbook for Practitioners, ed. Gabrielle Kaufmarm-Kohler& Blaise Stucki, 2004.

Aeberli P., Jurisdictional Disputes under the Arbitration Act 1996: A Procedural Route Map, 21(3) Arb Int. 2005.

Akıncı Z., Milletlerarası Usul Hukukunda Yetki Sözleşmesine Dayanan Yabancı Derdestlik, Ankara, 2002.

Alangoya Y., Medeni Usul Hukukumuzda Tahkimin Niteliği ve Denetlenmesi, İstanbul, 1973.

Alangoya Y./Yıldırım K./Yıldırım D. N., Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Tasarısı Değerlendirme ve Önerileri, İstanbul, 2006 (Alangoya/Yıldmm/Yıldınm, Tasarı).

Alangoya Y./Yıldınm K./Yıldırım D. N., Medenî Usul Hukuku Esasları, 7. Baskı, İstanbul, 2009.

Ambrose C, English arbitration law 2000, LMCLQ 2001.

Ancel J. P., French Judicial Attitudes Toward International Arbitration, 9(2) Arb hit, 1993.

Atalay O., Medeni Usul Hukukunda Menfi Vakıaların İspatı, İzmir 2001.

Audit B., A National Codification of International Commercial Arbitration: The French Decree of May 12, 1981, Resolving Transnational Disputes Through International Arbitration, Sixth Sokol Colloquium, ed, Thomas E. Carbonneau, 1984.

Bachand F., Does Article 8 of the Model Law Call for Ful lor Prima Facie Review of the Arbitral Tribunal's Jurisdiction, 22(3) Arb Int 2006.

Beraudo J. P., Case Law on Articles 5, 8 and 16 of the UNCITRAL Model Arbitration Law, 23(1) J. Int'l Arb. 2006.

• Berber L. K., Hakem Mahkemesinin Yetkisi Hakkında Karar Verme Yetkisi, Kompetenz-Kompetenz, Prof. Dr. İrfan Baştuğ Armağanı, Ankara, 2001.

• Berger K. P., International Economic Arbitration, Dev enter, Boston, 1993.

• Berti V. S., Art. 7, Kommentar zum schweizerischen Privatrecht, Internationales Privatrecht, Basel 1996, (KSP- Berti).

• Berti V. S./Schnyder K. A., Art 190, Kommentar zum schweizerischen Privatrecht, Internationales Privatrecht, Basel 1996, (KSP- Berti/Schnyder).

• Bilge N., Hakem Yargılamasından Uygulanacak Hukuk Kaideleri, Tahkim, IV. Ticaret ve Banka Hukuku Haftası, 29 Kasım-4 Aralık 1965.

• Bosch W., Rechtskraft und Rechtshângigkeit im Schiedsverfahren, Tübingen 1991.

• Broches A., UNCITRAL- Commentary on the Model Law, International Handbook on Commercial Arbitration, J. Paulsson ed, Suppl. 11,1990.

• Bucher A./Tschanz P.Y. International Arbitration in Switzerland, 1989.

• Calavros C., Das UNCITRAL-Modellgesetz über die internationale Handelsschiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Bielefeld, 1988.

• David R., Arbitration in International Trade, Deventer, Boston, London, Frankfurt/M., 1985.

• Dayınlarlı K., HUMK'da Düzenlenen İhtiyari İç Tahkim (m. 516-536), 2. Baskı, Ankara, 2004.

• Delvolve L. J./Rouche J./Pointon H. G., French Arbitration Law and Practice, 2003.

• Deren-Yıldınm N., UNCITRAL Model Kanunu ve Milletlerarası Tahkim Kanunu Çerçevesinde Milletlerarası Tahkimin Esaslı Sorunları, İstanbul 2004.

• Dimolitsa A., Separability and Kompetenz-Kompetenz, Improving the Efficiency of Arbitration Agreements and Awards, 40 years of Application of the New York Convention, ICCA Congress Series No. 9,1999.

• Ertekin E/ECarataş İ., Uygulamada İhtiyari Tahkim ve Yabancı Hakem Kararlarının Tenfizi ve Tanınması, Ankara 1997.

• Fouchard P./Gaillard E/Goldman B., on International Commercial Arbitration, Part I-II, ed. Emmanuel Gaillard and John Savage, The Hague, Boston, London, 1999.

• Freedberg-Swartzburg J. A., Court Assistance in The Appointment of Arbitrators, Law and Reality, Essays on National and International Procedural Law, in Honor of Corneils Carel Albert Voskuil, ed. SUMAMPOUW M/BARNHOORN L.A.N.M/ FREEDBERG-SCHWARTZBUR J. AG/TROMM J.J.M/WADE

• Fremuth-Wolf A., Art 584, Arbitration Law of Austria: Practice and Procedure, 2007.

• Gaillard E., Laws and Court Decisions in Civil Law Countries, I. Preventing Delay and Disruption of Arbitration, II., Effective Proceeddings in Construction Cases, ICCA Congress Series No. 5, 1992, (Gaillard, CourtDecisions).

• Gaillard E., The Negative Effect of Competence-Competence, 17(1) Mealey's IAR 2002.

• Gaillard E./Banifatemi Y., Negative Effect of Competence-Competence: The Rule of Priority in Favour of the Arbitrators, Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements and International Arbitral Awards, The New York Convention in Practice, ed. Emmanuel Gaillard and Domenico Di Pietro, 2009.

• Geisinger E./Frossard V., Challenge and Revision of the Award, Chapter 8, International Arbitration in Switzerland, A Handbook for Practitioners, ed. Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler& Blaise Stucki, 2004.

• Geisinger E./Levy L., Lis Alibi Pendens in International Commercial Arbitration, Complex Arbitrations, Perspectives on their Procedural Implications, ICC Bulletin Special Supplement, 2003.

• Harbst R., Die Rolle der staatlichen Gerichte im Schiedsverfahren, Ein Rechtsvergleich zwischen dem englischen Arbitration Act 1996 und deutschem Schiedsverfahrensrecht, Heidelberg, 2002.

• Hands B/Planterose R/Tecks J., The Arbitration Act 1996: A Commentary, Third Edition, 2007.

• Holtzmann H. M./Neuhaus E. J., A Guide To the UNCITRAL Model Law On International Commercial Arbitration: Legislative History, Part I-II, 1994.

• Huber P., § 1032, §1040, Arbitration in Germany, The Model Law Practice, 2007.

• Huber P., Das Verhâltnis von Schiedsgericht und staatlichen Gerichten bei der Entscheidung über die Zustandigkeit, SchiedsVZ 2003, (Huber, Schiedsgericht).

• Husslein-Stich G., Das UNCITRAL-Modellgesetz über die internationale Handelschieds- gerichtsbarkeit, Köln, 1990.

• Jermini C., Die Anfechtung der Schiedssprüche im internationalen Privatrecht, Nach dem schweizerischen Bundesgesetz über das Internationale Privatrecht, mit rechtscergleichenden Ausbhcken, Zürich, 1997.

• Joseph D., Jurisdiction and Arbitration Agreements and their Enforcement, London, 2005.

• Kalpsüz T., Türkiye'de Milletlerarası Tahkim, Ankara, 2007.

• Karrer A. P./Kalin-Nauer C., Is there a Favor Iurisdictiorıis Arbitriî-Siandards of Review of Arbitral Jurisdiction Decisions in Switzerland, 13(3) J Intl Arb, 1996.

• Kessedjian C., Court Decisions on Enforcement of Arbitral Agreements and Awards, 18(1) J. Arb Intl, 2001.

• Kröll Sv Recourse against Negative Decisions on Jurisdiction, 20(1) Arblnt, 2004.

• Kröll S., Das neue deutsche Schiedsrecht vor staatlichen Gerichten: Entwicklungslinien und Tendenzen 1998-2000, NJW 16/2001, (Kröll, Schiedsrecht).

• Kuru B., Hukuk Muhakemeleri Usulü Altına Baskı, C. IV, İstanbul, 2001

• Küçükgüngör E., Roma Hukukunda Tahkim, (Compromissum), C. XIX, BATİDER1998/3.

• Lew J. D. M./Mistelis L. A./Kröll S., Comparative International Commercial Arbitration, 2003.

• Milletlerarası Tahkim Konusunda Yasal bir Düzenleme Gerekir mi? II Taslaklar-Tartışmalar-Öneriler, 6 Haziran 1998, (Sempozyum, Katılımcı Soyadı).

• Moore J. B., 4 International Adjudications, Ancient and Modern, History and Documents, 1931.

• Musielak, H-J., Kommentar zur Zivüprozessordnung, 5., neubearbeitete Auflage München 2007, (Musielak-Voit).

• Münchener Kommentar zur Zivüprozessordnung, Band 3, 3. Auflage, 2001, (MünchKommZPO-Be«rfretter-Mündt).

• Nacimiento P./Abt A., §1034, Arbitration in Germany, The Model Law Practice, 2007.

• Oetiker C., The Principle of Lis Pendens in International Arbitration: The Swiss Decision in Fomento v. Colon, 18(2) Arb Int 2002.

• Özekes M., İcra ve İflas Hukukunda İhtiyati Haciz, Ankara, 1999.

• Özkaya-Ferendeci Ö. Hv Kesin Hükmün Objektif Sınırları, İstanbul, 2009.

• Patocchi P. M/fermini C., Art 192, Kommentar zum schweizerischen Privatrecht, Internationales Privatrecht, Basel 1996, (KSP-PatocchVJemıini).

• Pekeanıtez H./Atalay O/Özekes M., Medeni Usûl Hukuku, 8. Bası, Ankara, 2009.

• Perret F., Parallel Actions pending before an Arbitral Tribunal and a State Court: the Solution under Swiss Law, 16(3) Arb Int 2000.

• Perret F., Parallel Actions pending before an Arbitral Tribunal and a State Court: the Solution under Swiss Law, Arbitral Tribunals or State Courts Who Must defer to Whom, ASA Special Series No. 15,2001, (PERRET, Parallel Actions).

• Peter W./Legler T., Art 179, Kommentar zum schweizerischen Privatrecht, Internationales Privatrecht, Basel 1996, (KSP-Petei/ Legler).

• Poudret J. F., Concluding Remarks on Relationship Between State Courts and Arbitral Tribunals, Arbitral Tribunals or State Courts Who Must defer to Whom, ASA Special Series No. 15, 2001.

• Poudret J-F./Besson S., Comparative Law of International Arbitration, Translated by Stephen V. BERTT, Annette PONT1, 2007.

• Raesehke-Kessler H./Berger K.P., Recht und Praxis des Schiesverfahren, Köln, 1999.

• Samuel A., Jurisdictional Problems in International Commercial Arbitration: A Study of Belgian, Dutch, English, French, Swedish, Swiss, U.S and West German Law, Zurich, 1989.

• Samuel A., Separability in English Law-Should an Arbitration Clause Be Regarded as an Agreement Separate and Collateral to a Contract in Which It Is Contained? 3(3) J. Int'l Arb 1986, (Samuel, Separability).

• Scherer M., When should an Arbitral Tribunal Sitting in Switzerland Confronted with Parallel Litigation Abroad Stay the Arbitration, 19(3) ASA Bulletin, 2001.

• Schlosser P., Das Recht der internationalen privaten Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, 2., völlig neu bearbeitete Auflage, Tübingen 1989.

• Schlosser P., Arbitral Tribunals or State Courts Who Must defer to Whom, Arbitral Tribunals or State Courts Who Must defer to Whom, ASA Special Series No. 15, 2001, (Schlosser, StateCourts).

• Schlosser P., The Competence of Arbitrators and of Courts, 8(2) Arb Irit 1992, (Schlosser, Competence),

• Schwab K. H./Walter G./Baumbach A., Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, 6., neubearbeitete Auflage, München 2000.

• Shepherd C./Gooding E., Hong Kong Case Report: Applying Article 8(1) of the UNCITRAL Model Law-New Sound Industries Ltd v. Meliga Ltd., 1(1) Asian Intl Arb. J. 2005.

• Sonnauer H., Die Kontrolle der Schiedsgerichte durch die staatliche Gerichte, Köln, 1992

• Söderlund C., Lis Pendens, Res Judicata and the Issue of Parallel Judicial Proceedings, 22(4) J. Intl Arb 2005.

• Stein F/Jonas M., Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung, Tübingen 2002, (SteiîVJonas-Schlosser).

• Şanlı C, Uluslararası Ticari Akitlerin Hazırlanması ve Uyuşmazlıklarm Çözüm Yolları, 3. Bası, İstanbul, 2005.

• Tahkim, IV. Ticaret ve Banka Hukuku Haftası, 29 Kasım- 4 Aralık 1965 (Yazar Adı, Tartışmalar-Hafta).

• Tanrıver S., Medeni Usul Hukukunda Derdestlik İtirazı, Ankara, 1998.

• Taşkın A., Hakem Mahkemesinin Kendi Yetkisi Hakkında Hüküm Vermesi, AÜHFD1997/1-4.

• Umar B., Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Tasansı'na Katkı, Medenî Usûl ve İcra ve İflâs Hukukçuları Toplantısı, V, Ankara 8-9 Eylül 2006.

• Umar B., Hukuku Usulü Muhakemeleri Kanunumuzun (mehaz Neucâtel Kantonundaki) Tatbikatı, İstanbul , 1967, (Umar, Tatbikat).

• van den Berg J. A., The New York Arbitration Convention of 1958, Towards a Uniform Judicial Interpretation, 1981.

• van den Berg A. J. /van Delden R/Snijders H. J., Netherlands Arbitration Law, 1993.

• Vârady T./Barcelo J. J./vonMehren T. A., International Commercial Arbitration, Fourth Edition, 2009.

• von Mehren A. T., International Commercial Arbitration: The Contribution of the French Jurisprudence, 46 Louisiana L Rev, 1985-1986.

• von Schlabtendorff F/Sesler A., § 1055, Arbitration in Germany, The Model Law Practice, 2007.

• Voskuil C. C. A/Freedber- Swartzburg A. J., Composition of the Arbitral Tribunal, Essays on International Commercial Arbitration, ed. Petar Sarcevic, 1989.

• Wagner G., Germany, Practitioner's Handbook on International Arbitration, ed. Frank-Bernd Weigand, 2002.

• Walter G./Bosch W./Brönnimann J., Internationale Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit in der Schweis, Kommentar zu Kapitel 12 des IPR-Gesetzes, Bern 1991.

• Wenger W., Art. 186, Kommentar zum schweizerischen Privatrecht, Internationales Privatrecht, Basel 1996, (KSP-Wenger).

• Yeşilova B., Milletlerarası Tahkimin Hukuki Niteliği Üzerine Düşünceler ve Güncel Gelişmeler, TBBD 2008/76, (Yeşilova, Gelişmeler).

• Yeşilova B., Milletlerarası Ticari Tahkimde Nihai Karardan Önce Mahkemelerin Yardımı ve Denetimi, İzmir 2008.

• Yeşilova B., Tahkime Uygulanacak Hukuk (LexArbitri), Teorik Temelleri ve Düşündürdükleri, YÜHFD 2007/1, (Yeşilova, Lex arbitri).

• Zöller R., Zivilprozessordnung, Köln, 2007 (Zöller-Geimer).