Dear Colleagues
It is our pleasure to present the latest edition of our quarterly legal update curated for our distinguished peers within the Turkish legal community.
At Belgravia Law, we remain steadfast in our commitment to maintaining strong international relationships and staying well-informed on global legal developments. This ensures we remain at the forefront of evolving trends, regulatory changes and key insights which may influence our shared areas of practice.
We hope this edition proves to be both informative and engaging for you and your colleagues.
Kind regards
Belgravia Law
The selection of governing law and jurisdiction clauses is a fundamental aspect of international contracts. These clauses define the legal framework for resolving disputes and help manage risks by providing clarity on the applicable law and the competent forum. This article explores the key issues surrounding the drafting and enforcement of governing law and jurisdiction clauses in Türkiye, comparing them with the approach in the United Kingdom.
Recognition of Governing Law
In Türkiye, courts generally recognise and enforce foreign governing law clauses, in line with Article 2 of the Code on International Private and Procedural Law (“IPPL”). Under Turkish conflict of laws rules, Turkish courts are obligated to apply foreign law when it is clearly stipulated by the parties in a governing law clause. However, in certain instances courts may not uphold the choice of foreign law, particularly when it contradicts public policy or Turkish mandatory law. In practice, the Turkish Court of Appeals has consistently ruled in favour of respecting parties' chosen governing law, often relying on expert testimony to assist in interpreting foreign legal principles.
UK courts also adhere to the parties' choice of governing law, subject to the provision that the chosen law does not contradict English public policy. The UK approach is similar in its recognition of foreign governing law but is generally more flexible in ensuring the law chosen by the parties is enforceable, provided it does not undermine fundamental principles of UK law.
Formal Requirements for Governing Law Clauses
Turkish law does not impose strict formal requirements for a governing law clause to be valid. Under the IPPL, a governing law clause can be valid if it is the law of the place where the transaction was executed or the law chosen by the parties. Exceptions exist, especially in relation to rights concerning immovable property or inheritance matters, where Turkish law may be mandated regardless of the parties' choice.
In the UK, the formal requirements for a governing law clause are also minimal, provided the chosen law is valid under UK conflict of laws principles. UK courts similarly uphold governing law clauses unless there is a clear violation of public policy or statute.
Law Governing Procedural Issues
While the parties may agree on the governing law for substantive issues, procedural matters—such as rules of evidence, burden of proof and limitation of actions—are generally governed by the law of the forum (lex fori) in both Türkiye and the UK. In Türkiye, procedural rules are dictated by Turkish law, regardless of the parties' choice of governing law, unless a bilateral agreement exists between the countries involved. The Turkish courts, however, may sometimes allow the application of the parties' chosen law in relation to damages and limitation periods.
Similarly, UK courts apply their own procedural law, even if a foreign law governs the substance of the dispute. However, in some cases, procedural rules may be influenced by the governing law if it has specific provisions that apply to procedural matters.
Jurisdiction Clauses in Türkiye
Turkish courts recognise both exclusive and non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses, provided there is a sufficient connection to the foreign jurisdiction. A jurisdiction clause must clearly designate the court(s) that will have jurisdiction over disputes. If the jurisdiction clause is valid, Turkish courts will generally respect it, regardless of whether it designates Turkish or foreign courts. However, in cases where the jurisdiction clause is unclear or does not meet formal requirements, Turkish courts may assume jurisdiction based on alternative jurisdiction rules under the IPPL.
In the UK, English courts also respect jurisdiction clauses, but non-exclusive clauses often require careful interpretation. The case of Al Mana Lifestyle Trading LLC v United Fidelity Insurance Company PSC [2023] EWCA Civ 61 demonstrates the importance of clear wording so to distinguish between exclusive and non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses. The principle of forum conveniens underpins the interpretation of jurisdiction clauses by the English court, ensuring litigation occurs in the most appropriate jurisdiction.
Choice of Jurisdiction in Domestic Contracts
In Türkiye, domestic parties can choose a foreign jurisdiction for their contract if there is a relevant foreign element, such as the place of performance, the location of assets or the residence of one of the parties. This flexibility is similar to the UK, where domestic parties can select a foreign jurisdiction, but the choice must comply with UK conflict of laws principles and public policy.
Turkish law places limits on domestic parties’ ability to choose foreign jurisdiction if no foreign connection exists. For example, if the contract does not involve foreign elements, Turkish courts are more likely to assert jurisdiction, disregarding the foreign jurisdiction clause.
Mandatory Rules and Public Policy
In both Türkiye and the UK, mandatory laws can override the parties' choice of governing law. Turkish courts are particularly sensitive to public policy considerations and may refuse to enforce foreign law if it violates fundamental principles of Turkish law, such as the protection of national economic interests or cultural heritage. Similarly, UK courts may refuse to apply foreign law if it conflicts with key public policy principles, particularly in areas such as consumer protection, employment law or competition law.
Statutory provisions that aim to implement Turkiye’s economic, financial and social policies—such as those governing currency protection or cultural assets—take precedence over any choice of foreign law. In cases where the foreign law contradicts Turkish mandatory rules, Turkish law will apply.
Jurisdiction in the Absence of Choice
If a contract lacks a governing law or jurisdiction clause, Turkish courts will determine the applicable law by reference to connecting factors to the contract, typically focusing on where the characteristic performance of the contract occurs. Similarly, UK courts will apply the law most closely connected to the contract, considering factors such as the place of performance or the location of the parties.
Jurisdiction is determined similarly: in the absence of a jurisdiction clause, Turkish courts will apply the rules under the IPPL to decide where the dispute should be heard. This often depends on the residence or location of the parties or the place where the contract is to be performed.
Enforcement of Jurisdiction Clauses and Anti-Suit Injunctions
In cases where one party brings a lawsuit in a jurisdiction contrary to an exclusive jurisdiction clause, Turkish courts do not have a formal mechanism for issuing anti-suit injunctions. However, a party may challenge the jurisdiction of the court at the preliminary stage and the court will examine whether it is competent to hear the case based on the jurisdiction clause.
In the UK, anti-suit injunctions can be issued to prevent a party from pursuing litigation in a jurisdiction other than the one agreed in the contract. UK courts are more proactive in enforcing jurisdiction clauses, particularly exclusive ones, to ensure disputes are resolved in the designated forum.
Conclusion
The application of governing law and jurisdiction clauses are critical to international contracts. Both Türkiye and the UK offer substantial flexibility in this regard. While both countries uphold the principle of party autonomy in selecting governing law and jurisdiction, they also impose certain limitations based on public policy and mandatory legal provisions. Understanding the key differences between these two legal systems is essential when drafting contracts that may involve parties or assets from multiple jurisdictions. By considering the nuances of each system, parties can ensure their contracts are enforceable and disputes can be resolved efficiently in the appropriate forum.
The Arbitration Act 2025 officially received Royal Assent on 24 February 2025, marking the completion of its passage through Parliament. This new Act closely follows the recommendations made by the Law Commission in response to a government request to review the Arbitration Act 1996 and ensure its continued relevance in promoting the UK as a leading hub for international commercial arbitration.
The Law Commission's review, following a consultation period, culminated in the publication of its recommendations in September 2023. These proposed amendments aim to enhance the arbitration framework, ensuring it remains effective and competitive on the global stage.
Sir Peter Fraser, Chair of the Law Commission, commented on the significance of the Bill’s passage:
"The Arbitration Act 2025 marks a pivotal step in advancing the UK’s arbitration landscape. By enacting the Law Commission’s recommendations, we are not only strengthening the arbitration framework but also reaffirming the UK’s status as the premier jurisdiction for commercial arbitration. This will ensure the UK remains a top destination for international arbitration."
Bar Council’s Response to the New Act
The Bar Council has also expressed its support for the passing of the Arbitration Bill 2025. The updated Act aligns with the Law Commission’s recommendations and brings welcome clarity to the existing framework, further cementing the UK’s position as a global leader in arbitration.
According to the Law Commission, there are over 5,000 domestic and international arbitrations annually in England and Wales, generating £2.5 billion in fees. This underlines the significant economic contribution of arbitration to the British legal system.
Barbara Mills KC, Chair of the Bar Council, highlighted the importance of the new legislation:
"We welcome the Arbitration Act 2025, which will further enhance the UK’s standing as a leading centre for arbitration. This industry is worth billions to the British economy. In particular, we value the clarity the new Act provides regarding the law applicable to arbitration agreements, which we anticipate will increase the number of disputes arbitrated in England and Wales.
Additionally, the Act strengthens the role of courts in supporting arbitration and allows for the summary dismissal of meritless claims, increasing efficiency in arbitral proceedings … The modernisation of the UK’s arbitration framework ensures the country remains competitive in the international arbitration market.”
Further information about the Law Commission’s arbitration law reform project, including their recommendations, can be found on the project page.
Reforming the Arbitration Act 1996
The Arbitration Act 1996 governs arbitration in England and Wales, as well as Northern Ireland, with London recognised as a prominent arbitration center. A significant number of international commercial agreements are governed by English and Welsh law.
In March 2021, the Conservative government asked the Law Commission to review the Arbitration Act to ensure it remains effective and relevant. After consultations in September 2022 and March 2023, the Law Commission issued its final recommendations in September 2023. These included proposals for arbitration agreements, challenging arbitrator decisions and enhancing the court’s role in supporting arbitration proceedings.
The Law Commission emphasised that, while improvements were necessary, the core structure of the Act was generally working well and did not require radical reform. The government accepted these recommendations and introduced the Bill in the House of Lords on 21 November 2023. The Bill progressed through a public bill committee but was halted when Parliament was prorogued in May 2024.
Bill Progress
The Labour government, in the King’s Speech on 17 July 2024, pledged to reintroduce the Bill. It was presented in the House of Lords the next day, reflecting amendments from the previous version and incorporating changes related to the law governing arbitration agreements in investor-state disputes.
On 11 September 2024, the Bill underwent further amendments in the House of Lords, specifically regarding appeals on decisions to stay legal proceedings. A consequential change was also made to the Bill’s title.
As the Bill continues to move forward through the legislative process, we will keep you updated with further developments and any changes that may arise in the coming stages of its consideration.
As we move further into 2025, several key regulations from the European Union are set to take effect. Businesses should familiarise themselves with these new rules to ensure compliance and avoid potential penalties:
Digital Operational Resilience Act (“DORA”): Effective from 17 January 2025, DORA establishes a robust framework aimed at ensuring financial entities can withstand, respond to and recover from various ICT-related disruptions and threats.
EU Data Act: While the EU Data Act came into force on 11 January 2024, most of its provisions will apply from 12 September 2025. This legislation introduces new standards for the exchange, distribution and use of both personal and non-personal data, as well as improving data interoperability and data-sharing practices.
Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (“CSRD”): From 2025 onwards, the CSRD will require large companies to disclose information about how they manage social and environmental risks. This directive aims to standardise sustainability reporting across the EU, promoting greater transparency for investors and other stakeholders.
Entry/Exit System (“EES”): Set to be implemented in 2025, the EES is an EU-wide electronic system for registering entry, exit and refusal of entry data for third-country nationals crossing EU borders. This system is designed to modernise border management and improve security.
European Travel Information and Authorisation System (“ETIAS”): Starting in late 2025, ETIAS will require visa-exempt non-EU nationals, including UK citizens, to obtain travel authorisation before entering Schengen Area countries. This authorisation, valid for up to three years, aims to strengthen security by pre-screening travellers.
Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (“CBAM”): Entering its transitional phase in October 2023, CBAM will require importers to report the carbon emissions embedded in certain goods. Beginning in 2026, importers will need to purchase certificates reflecting the carbon price that would have been paid if the goods were produced under EU carbon pricing rules. This measure is designed to prevent carbon leakage and promote cleaner industrial production worldwide.
Cyber Resilience Act: Proposed in September 2022, this act aims to set unified cybersecurity standards for hardware and software products in the EU. After adoption, manufacturers will have a two-year period to comply with the new requirements, with enforcement expected to begin in late 2027.
Businesses with EU connections must stay informed and prepared for these regulatory changes to ensure compliance and smooth operations in 2025.
2 February 2025
The prohibitions on AI systems identified as presenting "unacceptable risks" came into force. This includes bans on systems that exploit vulnerabilities in specific groups, use subliminal techniques or are applied for social scoring.
2 May 2025
The AI Office will be responsible for supporting the creation of codes of practice for providers of general-purpose AI models. If these codes are not completed by 2 August 2025 or are deemed insufficient, the European Commission may step in to establish uniform rules for these providers.
2 August 2025
The obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models will take effect, including requirements for technical documentation, compliance with copyright laws and transparency around training data. Additionally, EU Member States will begin enforcing rules regarding the notification of authorities, penalties and administrative fines.
Organisations engaged in AI development or deployment within the EU should ensure they are prepared to meet these deadlines and comply with the new regulatory framework.
On 2 February 2025, the EU AI Act reached an important milestone that all businesses utilising artificial intelligence should be aware of. This marks a significant moment to ensure AI is developed and used responsibly throughout Europe.
Eliminate Prohibited AI Practices:
The following Al practices are prohibited from 2 February 2025:
Subliminal, manipulative or deceptive techniques
Exploitation of vulnerabilities of individuals due to age, disability, or social or economic situation
Social scoring leading to detrimental or unfavourable treatment
Predictive policing
Facial recognition databases through image scraping
Emotion inference in workplace or education institutions (except for medical or safety reasons)
Biometric categorisation to deduct or infer certain characteristics
Real-time biometric identification systems in public spaces for law enforcement (except for targeted search, prevention of substantial and imminent threat or identification of serious suspects)
Businesses must now make sure their AI systems avoid practices considered “unacceptable” under the new regulations. Failure to comply could result in fines of up to €35 million or 7% of the company’s annual revenue.
Enhancing AI Knowledge Within the Organisation:
Whether implementing a high-risk AI system or incorporating AI into daily operations, staff should be equipped with the knowledge of AI’s ethical and practical implications.
This milestone serves as a reminder that regulation and innovation can work together. By taking these necessary steps, businesses ensure legal compliance while building trust with users and stakeholders in an increasingly AI-driven world.
The English court lacked jurisdiction to hear claims regarding the fairness, reasonableness and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms of licences offered by Dutch and US companies for certain standard-essential patents (“SEPs”) related to high-definition television technology. The claims were not properly characterised as requests for declarations of non-liability for patent infringement, thus falling outside the scope of Article 7(2) of EU Regulation 1215/2012 and CPR PD 6B para 3.1(9). Although the claims involved UK patents, they did not fall under para 3.1(11) as there was no legal claim asserting a right to a FRAND licence.
The judge correctly found the former banker guilty of serious and deliberate breaches of disclosure obligations under a freezing injunction, resulting in his 12-month prison sentence for contempt. While the decision to impose immediate imprisonment was not erroneous, the court exercised mercy by suspending the sentence, giving the contemnor a final opportunity to comply with his disclosure duties, despite being unrepresented.
Belgravia Law is expanding its practice areas to include high-value property and construction disputes, bringing extensive expertise and a proven track record of success. With a team that combines in-depth legal knowledge, strategic negotiation and litigation skills, Belgravia Law is well-equipped to protect its clients' interests and achieve optimal outcomes. We offer comprehensive support in various property disputes, including landlord-tenant issues, leases, commercial contracts, finance, service charges and land acquisitions and disposals.
Based in the heart of London, Belgravia Law specialises in high-value property disputes within the local market, handling cases involving complex ownership structures, intricate contractual arrangements and significant financial stakes. Whether clients face disputes involving luxury residences, commercial investments or mixed-use developments, the firm delivers technical legal expertise alongside a deep understanding of the local market to achieve the best possible results.
Recent Property Dispute Cases:
Advising on the redomicile of SPVs owning a significant real estate asset in Belgravia.
Providing counsel on the sale and letting of a house in Belgravia owned by a complex trust structure, spanning multiple jurisdictions including New Zealand, BVI and the UK.
Representing a penthouse owner in a dispute over repair costs for an apartment building roof, securing a claim based on the management company agreement.
Defending a UHNWI in the Court of Appeal against appeals related to a £35 million Surrey house awarded by the High Court, involving contentious trust law.
Advising on the contentious sale of a £10 million detached freehold house with four titles in a desirable London suburb.
Acting for a property owner in a Land Registry rectification claim following incomplete registration during conveyancing.
Supporting clients in Knightsbridge whose apartments were damaged by flooding, negotiating insurance contributions and service charge adjustments for repairs exceeding £5 million.
Belgravia Law also has significant experience in resolving construction disputes, offering tailored legal solutions to address the complexities and high stakes often found in the construction sector. Representing contractors, developers, architects, engineers and property owners, the firm handles a wide range of contentious matters. Understanding that construction disputes can escalate quickly, Belgravia Law prioritises early intervention with proactive case management to help clients mitigate risks and explore alternative dispute resolution options.
Recent Construction Dispute Cases:
Advising a UK property developer on a contractual dispute related to a USD 300 million development in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Representing an employer in a multi-million-pound arbitration concerning the termination of a contractor and counterclaim for defective works.
Acting for a contractor in an adjudication over the value of works at a dock redevelopment.
Representing homeowners in mediation against a national building company regarding defects in a newly built property.
We are pleased to announce Ceyda Ilgen is a registered immigration advisor with the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (“OISC”).
At Belgravia Law, we offer comprehensive assistance with all immigration matters, including visa support for your business needs in the UK. Whether you are looking to establish or expand your operations, we offer expert guidance on obtaining the right visas to ensure a smooth process for your business and workforce needs. Please feel free to contact us with any questions or for support regarding your visa requirements in the UK.
Belgravia Law is pleased to announce its participation in “The Great Debate – The Impact of AI on Construction,” a significant event on 5 February 2025. The debate was chaired by esteemed High Court Judge Mrs Justice Jefford, featuring expert panellists Marion Smith KC of 39 Essex Chambers, Martha Tsigkari from Foster + Partners and Ankura experts Nate Huber-Fliflet and Tom Francis. This event was a great opportunity to explore the evolving role of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in the construction industry, particularly its influence on dispute resolution and project efficiency.
Key discussion points will include:
The evolution of AI in live construction projects and its role in resolving disputes.
How AI is enhancing efficiency and productivity in construction projects.
Innovative uses of AI in formulating claims, expert opinions and legal arguments, along with the ethical considerations these applications raise.
The increasing role of AI in formal tribunals and courts and its potential future integration into judicial processes.
As AI technologies continue to shape the design and engineering of buildings with remarkable speed and accuracy, this debate will examine their impact on the entire construction lifecycle—from initial concept to dispute resolution.
For all enquiries please write to: contact@belgravia.law.
Download this newsletter in PDF