ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SEBEPSĠZ ZENGĠNLEġME ĠLKESĠ

Modern ulusal hukuk düzenlerinin hemen hemen tamamı tarafından benimsenen ve baĢka bir hukuk kiĢisinin malvarlığından veya emeğinden haksız bir biçimde zenginleĢen kiĢinin söz konusu zenginleĢmeyi iade etme yükümlülüğü altında bulunduğunu öngören sebepsiz zenginleĢme ilkesi, sömürgeciliğin tasfiyesi döneminden bu yana uluslararası hukuk çatısı altında da ileri sürülmekte ve bazı uluslararası hukukçular ilkenin Uluslararası Adalet Divanı Statüsü‟nün 38. maddesi bağlamında bir hukuk genel ilkesi olduğunu ve dolayısıyla bir uluslararası hukuk kaynağı teĢkil ettiğini savunmaktadır. Bununla birlikte, bu iddia, diğer bazı yazarlar ve uluslararası yargı kararları tarafından reddedilmekte ve varlığı evrensel olarak kabul edilmiĢ olsa da, devletlerin ulusal mevzuatlarında farklı biçimlerde düzenlenen ve uygulanan sebepsiz zenginleĢme ilkesinin uluslararası uyuĢmazlıklarda onarım taleplerinin temeline yerleĢtirilemeyeceği dile getirilmektedir. Elinizdeki çalıĢma, kaynağını iç hukuklarda bulan sebepsiz zenginleĢme ilkesinin uluslararası hukuk çatısı altındaki niteliği üzerinde durmakta ve ilkenin bir hukuk genel ilkesi teĢkil edip etmediğini tartıĢmaktadır

THE PRINCIPLE OF UNJUST ENRICHMENT IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

The doctrine of unjust enrichment which provides that a person who has been unjustly enriched at the expense of another is required to make restitution to the other is maintained by almost all modern national legal orders. Since the decolonization period, the concept is being discussed also in international law. Some scholars and international judicial decisions argue that the principle of unjust enrichment is a general principle of law which thus constitutes, under Article 38 of the ICJ Statute, a source of international law. However, some other scholars and international judicial decisions refute this idea and argue that the principle of unjust enrichment whose regulation reveals considerable national differences of technical kind cannot be considered as a legal ground of reparation claims in international law. In this context, this paper discusses the legal nature of the concept of unjust enrichment in international law.

PDF

___

LDRICH George, The Jurisprudence of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996.

BEDJAOUI Mohammed, “Problèmes récents de succession d‟Etats dans les Etats nouveaux”, RCADI, Vol. 130, 1970, ss. 455-586.

DAVID R. J. A., “The Doctrine of Unjustified Enrichment: II. Unjustified Enrichment in French law”, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1934, ss. 205-223.

DICKSON Brice, “Unjust Enrichment Claims: A Comparative Overview”, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 54, No. 1, 1995, ss. 100-126.

DUMBERRY Patrick, State Succession to International Responsibility, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden / Boston, 2007.

ELKIN-KOREN Niva / SALZBERGER Eli M., “Towards an Economic Theory of Unjust Enrichment Law”, International Review of Law and Economics, Vol. 20, 2000, ss. 551-573.

EREN Fikret, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, Yetkin Yayınları, Ankara, 2017.

FOMBAD Charles Manga, “The principle of unjust enrichment in international law”, Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa, Vol. 30, Issue 2, 1997, ss. 120-130.

FRANCIONI Francesco, “Compensation for Nationalisation of Foreign Property: The Borderland Between Law and Equity”, International and Comparative

Law Quarterly, Vol. 24, 1975, ss. 255-283.

FRIEDMANN Wolfgang, The Changing Structure of International Law, Stevens & Sons, London, 1964.

FRIEDMANN Wolfgang, “The Principle of Unjust Enrichment in English Law”, Canadian Bar Review, Vol. 16, 1938, ss. 365-386.

GALLO Paolo, “Unjust Enrichment: A Comparative Analysis”, American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 40, No. 2, 1992, ss. 431-465.

GARCIA-AMADOR F. V. / SOHN Louis B. / BAXTER R. R., Recent Codification of the Law of State Responsibility for Injuries to Aliens, A. W. Sijthoff, Leiden, 1974.

GUGGENHEIM Paul, Traité de droit international public, Tome I, Georg & Cie S. A, Genève, Librairie de l‟Université, 1953.

GUTTERIDGE H. C. / DAVID R. J. A., “The Doctrine of Unjust Enrichment”, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1934, ss. 204-229.

HEDLEY Steve, “Unjust Enrichment”, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 54, No. 3, 1995, ss. 578-599.

HEDLEY Steve, “Unjust Enrichment as the Basis of Restitution - An Overworked Concept”, Legal Studies, Vol. 5, No. 1, 1985, ss. 56-66.

McCAMUS John D., “The Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment”, Canadian Bar Review, Vol. 90, 2011, ss. 439-467.

NOMER Halûk N., Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, Beta, Ġstanbul, 2020.

NUSSBAUM Arthur, “Arbitration Between the Lena Goldfields Ltd. and the Soviet Government”, Cornell Law Review, Vol. 36, Issue 1, 1950, ss. 31-53.

O‟CONNELL Daniel Patrick, State Succession in Municipal Law and International Law, Vol. I, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1967.

O‟CONNELL Daniel Patrick, “Unjust Enrichment”, The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 5, No. 1, 1956, ss. 2-17.

OĞUZMAN Kemal / ÖZ, Turgut, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, Cilt 2, Vedat Kitapçılık, Ġstanbul, 2013.

OĞUZMAN Kemal / ÖZ, Turgut, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, Cilt 2, Vedat Kitapçılık, Ġstanbul, 2016.

PAZARCI Hüseyin, Uluslararası Hukuk, Turhan Kitabevi, Ankara, 2016.

PĠRĠM Ceren Zeynep, Devletlerin Uluslararası Sorumluluğa Halefiyeti, Turhan Kitabevi, Ankara, 2016.

RIPERT Georges, La règle morale dans les obligations civiles, LGDJ, Paris, 1994 (1949).

RIPERT Georges, “Les règles du droit civil applicables aux rapports internationaux (Contribution à l‟étude des principes généraux du droit visés au statut de la Cour permanente de justice internationale)”, RCADI, 1933, Vol. 44, ss. 565-664.

SAGAERT Vincent, “Unjust Enrichment and Change of Position”, Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2004, ss. 159-186.

SCHREUER Christoph H., “Unjustified Enrichment in International Law”, The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 22, No. 2, 1974, ss. 281-301.

SCHWARZENBERGER Georg, International Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals, Vol. I, Steven & Sons Limited, London, 1957.

SHERWIN Emily, Reparations and Unjust Enrichment, Cornell Law Faculty Publications, 2004, Paper 6.

UDINA Manlio, “La succession des Etats quant aux obligations internationales autres que les dettes publiques”, RCADI, Tome 44, 1933-II, ss. 769-770.

VEEDER V. V., “The Lena Goldfields Arbitration: The Historical Roots of Three Ideas”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 47, Issue 4, 1998, ss. 747-792.

VOLKOVITSCH Michael John, “Righting Wrongs: Toward a New Theory of State Succession to Responsibility for International Delicts”, Columbia Law Review, Vol. 92, No. 8, 1992, ss. 2162-2214.

VON CAEMMERER Ernst M., “Problèmes fondamentaux de l‟enrichissement sans cause”, Revue internationale de droit comparé, Vol. 18, No. 3, 1966, ss. 573- 592.

WEBB Charlie, “What is Unjust Enrichment?”, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 29, No. 2, 2009, ss. 215-243.