Maritime Arbitration in Turkey: Charterparty, Cargo and Shipbuilding Disputes

Maritime arbitration in Turkey is an important dispute-resolution mechanism for shipowners, charterers, carriers, cargo interests, shipyards, shipbuilders, insurers, P&I clubs, commodity traders, freight forwarders and international lenders.

Maritime transactions frequently involve parties, ships, cargoes and contractual documents connected with several jurisdictions. A vessel may be owned in one country, registered in another, chartered by a company established in a third jurisdiction and employed to carry cargo between ports located in several different states.

When a dispute arises, the parties may need to determine:

• Which arbitration agreement applies;
• Which party is the contractual carrier;
• Whether a bill of lading incorporates a charterparty arbitration clause;
• Whether the vessel was seaworthy;
• Whether hire was suspended during an off-hire event;
• Whether laytime expired and demurrage became payable;
• Whether the cargo was lost, damaged or delivered late;
• Whether the carrier may limit liability;
• Whether the shipyard completed the vessel according to specification;
• Whether delay liquidated damages are payable;
• Whether a ship can be arrested in Türkiye to secure an arbitration claim;
• Where the resulting award may be enforced.

Arbitration can provide a neutral, specialised and flexible forum for these disputes. The parties may appoint arbitrators experienced in charterparties, bills of lading, vessel construction, marine engineering, cargo claims and international trade.

The proceedings may be conducted in English, documentary evidence may be exchanged electronically and expert evidence may be presented by naval architects, marine engineers, master mariners, surveyors, naval economists and cargo specialists.

However, maritime arbitration does not operate independently from Turkish maritime and enforcement law.

A tribunal may decide the parties’ contractual rights, but Turkish courts and enforcement authorities remain necessary where a party seeks to arrest a ship, register a maritime security interest, compel a third party or enforce an award against a vessel or other assets.

This article explains the principal forms of maritime arbitration in Turkey, with particular emphasis on charterparty, cargo and shipbuilding disputes.

Turkish Legal Framework for Maritime Arbitration

The principal legal sources include:

• Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102;
• International Arbitration Law No. 4686;
• Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098;
• Law No. 5718 on Private International Law and International Civil Procedure;
• Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100;
• Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law;
• Applicable international conventions;
• Institutional or ad hoc arbitration rules selected by the parties.

International Arbitration Law No. 4686 generally applies where the arbitration has a foreign element and Türkiye is selected as the seat, or where the statute is otherwise validly selected within its scope. The law recognises disputes involving parties in different states, cross-border movement of goods or capital and foreign-connected contractual performance as international in character.

The parties may determine the procedural rules directly or by incorporating institutional rules. They may also select the seat, language, number of arbitrators and law applicable to the dispute, subject to mandatory provisions and fundamental procedural equality.

Commercial maritime disputes are generally arbitrable because they concern economic rights over which the parties may dispose.

Greater caution is required where the requested remedy directly concerns public registration, compulsory enforcement, criminal liability, administrative sanctions or the rights of non-signatories.

What Is Maritime Arbitration?

Maritime arbitration is the determination of a maritime or shipping dispute by one or more private arbitrators appointed under an arbitration agreement.

The arbitration agreement may be contained in:

• A charterparty;
• A bill of lading;
• A booking note;
• A shipbuilding contract;
• A vessel sale agreement;
• A ship management agreement;
• A towage contract;
• A salvage agreement;
• A marine insurance policy;
• A guarantee;
• A settlement agreement.

The parties may choose an institution such as ISTAC or another international arbitration institution. They may alternatively create an ad hoc procedure.

ISTAC’s official model clause provides that disputes arising out of or connected with a contract may be finally resolved under the ISTAC Arbitration Rules. The parties may supplement that clause by specifying the place of arbitration, language, number of arbitrators and law applicable to the merits.

Why Maritime Disputes Are Suitable for Arbitration

Maritime disputes often require specialist knowledge that is not limited to general contract law.

A charterparty arbitration may require interpretation of concepts such as:

• Laytime;
• Demurrage;
• Despatch;
• Off-hire;
• Safe port;
• Notice of readiness;
• Speed and consumption;
• Final voyage;
• Redelivery notices;
• Cargo retention;
• Freight liens.

A cargo dispute may require analysis of:

• Bills of lading;
• Mate’s receipts;
• Survey reports;
• Stowage plans;
• Temperature logs;
• Hatch-cover records;
• Container seals;
• Delivery records;
• Causation of damage.

A shipbuilding dispute may require detailed consideration of:

• Technical specifications;
• Classification requirements;
• Design approval;
• Construction schedules;
• Change orders;
• Sea-trial results;
• Speed, capacity and fuel-consumption guarantees;
• Defect rectification;
• Delivery and acceptance.

Arbitration allows the parties to appoint a tribunal with experience in these issues and to establish a procedure proportionate to the dispute.

Governing Law of Maritime Contracts

International maritime contracts frequently contain an express governing-law clause.

Under Article 24 of Law No. 5718, contractual obligations are governed by the law expressly chosen by the parties. The choice may apply to the entire agreement or only part of it. In the absence of a valid choice, the law most closely connected with the contract applies.

Contracts for carriage of goods are also subject to the specific rule in Article 29. The parties may choose the applicable law. Without a choice, the carrier’s principal place of business may become relevant where it coincides with the place of loading, discharge or the sender’s principal place of business. Single-voyage charterparties and other contracts whose main purpose is carriage of goods are included within this framework.

The governing law of the main contract should be distinguished from:

• The law governing the arbitration agreement;
• The procedural law of the arbitral seat;
• The law governing the vessel’s registration;
• The law governing maritime security;
• The law of the arrest jurisdiction;
• The law of award enforcement.

For example, a charterparty may be governed by English law, provide for arbitration seated in Istanbul and involve the arrest of a foreign-flagged ship in Türkiye.

Charterparty Disputes in Turkey

Charterparty disputes constitute a major category of maritime arbitration.

The Turkish Commercial Code regulates several legally distinct arrangements:

• Ship lease agreements;
• Time charterparties;
• Voyage charterparties;
• Contracts for carriage of identified goods.

Correct classification matters because different rights, responsibilities and statutory provisions may apply.

Bareboat and Ship Lease Disputes

Under Article 1119 of the Turkish Commercial Code, a ship lease is an agreement through which the lessor grants the lessee the use of the vessel for a specified period in return for rent. The fact that crew members may also be placed at the lessee’s disposal does not necessarily change the legal classification.

Common disputes include:

• Late delivery of the vessel;
• Failure to deliver the vessel in seaworthy condition;
• Unpaid rent;
• Allocation of maintenance expenses;
• Insurance obligations;
• Crew liabilities;
• Damage to the vessel;
• Failure to redeliver;
• Condition on redelivery.

The Turkish Commercial Code requires the lessor to deliver the vessel at the agreed time and place in a seaworthy condition and fit for the contractual purpose. It also allocates certain repair, maintenance and operational expenses between the lessor and lessee.

The arbitration clause should cover disputes concerning possession, operation, insurance, repairs and redelivery.

Where the lease is annotated in the Turkish Ship Registry, the annotation may affect subsequent owners by requiring them to respect the lessee’s contractual use rights. Registration-related remedies nevertheless require coordination with the competent registry and courts.

Time Charterparty Disputes

A time charterparty is defined under Article 1131 as an agreement under which the provider makes the commercial management of an equipped vessel available to the charterer for a specified period in return for hire, while retaining technical management and possession.

The owner or disponent owner is generally responsible for technical management, while the charterer controls the vessel’s commercial employment within the contract.

Common time-charter disputes concern:

• Delivery and cancellation;
• Seaworthiness;
• Speed and fuel consumption;
• Off-hire;
• Underperformance;
• Unsafe ports or berths;
• Employment orders;
• Bunker quality;
• Unpaid hire;
• Withdrawal;
• Final voyage;
• Late redelivery;
• Damage caused by cargo operations.

Under the Turkish statutory framework, the provider must make the vessel available at the agreed time and place and keep it seaworthy, voyage-worthy and suitable for the contractual purpose. The charterer bears the expenses arising from commercial operation, including fuel required for the vessel’s machinery.

Hire is ordinarily payable monthly in advance. Where the vessel remains commercially unusable for more than 24 hours, the statutory rule provides that hire is not payable for the relevant period, subject to the contract and facts.

A time charterparty should define off-hire events precisely. It should identify:

• The event triggering off-hire;
• Whether complete loss of time is required;
• Whether partial loss is sufficient;
• The period of deduction;
• Burden of proof;
• Treatment of concurrent causes.

Speed and Consumption Claims

Performance warranties commonly state that the vessel can achieve a specified speed while consuming a stated quantity of fuel under defined weather and sea conditions.

Disputes may arise because:

• Weather data differs;
• Currents affected performance;
• The vessel was fouled;
• The charterer used unsuitable fuel;
• The route was inefficient;
• The warranty applied only in good weather;
• The vessel’s draft or trim differed from the contractual condition.

A claimant should not compare total voyage time with the warranty mechanically.

The evidence may include:

• Deck and engine logs;
• Noon reports;
• Weather-routing data;
• AIS records;
• Bunker-consumption records;
• Surveyor calculations;
• Expert performance models.

The charterparty should explain how good-weather periods are selected and whether performance during those periods may be extrapolated to the entire voyage.

Safe Port and Safe Berth Claims

A charterer may be required to nominate a safe port or berth.

Disputes may concern:

• Insufficient depth;
• Tidal restrictions;
• Political risks;
• War risks;
• Ice;
• Congestion;
• Unsafe mooring;
• Defective port equipment;
• Infectious-disease restrictions;
• Inadequate security.

The tribunal may need to determine whether the danger was temporary, abnormal, foreseeable or avoidable through proper navigation.

Causation remains important. The existence of a danger does not automatically establish that the port nomination caused the vessel’s damage or delay.

Redelivery Disputes

At the end of the charter, the vessel must be redelivered at the agreed place, time and condition.

Disputes may concern:

• Early or late redelivery;
• Invalid redelivery notices;
• Final voyage orders;
• Bunker quantities;
• Vessel condition;
• Cargo residues;
• Unrepaired damage.

Under Article 1137, late redelivery under the statutory time-charter regime may require payment calculated at twice the hire applicable at the end of the charter period, unless greater loss is proved.

The parties may agree on a different contractual damages mechanism, subject to mandatory law and enforceability analysis.

Voyage Charterparty Disputes

Under Article 1138, a voyage charter involves the carrier undertaking sea carriage in return for freight while allocating the whole vessel, part of it or a specified space to the charterer. The parties may request a voyage charterparty recording the contractual conditions.

Common voyage-charter disputes include:

• Vessel nomination;
• Readiness;
• Cancellation;
• Laytime;
• Demurrage;
• Deadfreight;
• Freight;
• Loading and discharge expenses;
• Port nomination;
• Cargo quantity;
• Deviation;
• Cargo retention;
• Final freight adjustment.

Notice of Readiness, Laytime and Demurrage

Laytime disputes often turn on whether a valid notice of readiness was given.

Questions may include:

• Whether the vessel arrived at the contractual destination;
• Whether it was physically ready;
• Whether holds were clean;
• Whether customs or port formalities were completed;
• Whether free pratique was obtained;
• Whether the notice was given during permitted hours;
• Whether an invalid notice later became effective.

The tribunal must calculate the permitted laytime by applying the charterparty’s rules concerning:

• Working days;
• Weather working days;
• Holidays;
• Shifting time;
• Interruptions;
• Strikes;
• Congestion;
• Reversible laytime;
• Exceptions.

Demurrage is generally calculated after allowed laytime expires. The contract should state the demurrage rate, calculation unit, supporting documents and claim-notification period.

Seaworthiness

Seaworthiness is central to both charterparty and cargo disputes.

Article 1141 requires the carrier to ensure that the vessel is seaworthy, voyage-worthy and cargo-worthy. The carrier may be liable for losses arising from unseaworthiness unless the deficiency could not have been discovered before the beginning of the voyage despite the care expected from a prudent carrier.

Unseaworthiness may concern:

• Hull integrity;
• Machinery;
• Navigation equipment;
• Crew competence;
• Hatch covers;
• Refrigeration;
• Fire-fighting systems;
• Cargo spaces;
• Charts and voyage planning;
• Required certificates.

The claimant must connect the relevant deficiency with the alleged loss.

Cargo Claims under Turkish Maritime Law

Cargo arbitration may involve claims by:

• Shippers;
• Charterers;
• Consignees;
• Bill-of-lading holders;
• Cargo insurers exercising subrogation rights;
• Commodity sellers or buyers;
• Freight forwarders.

The first jurisdictional question is whether the claimant and respondent are bound by the arbitration clause.

The second is whether the respondent was the contractual or actual carrier responsible for the relevant stage of carriage.

Bills of Lading

Article 1228 defines a bill of lading as a document evidencing the contract of carriage, showing that the goods were received or loaded and obliging the carrier to deliver the goods only against presentation of the document. Bills may be made out to a named person, to order or to bearer.

The bill of lading may serve several functions:

• Evidence of the carriage contract;
• Receipt for the goods;
• Document controlling delivery;
• Transferable commercial document.

Disputes commonly concern:

• Carrier identity;
• Description of goods;
• Quantity and weight;
• Apparent condition;
• Clean or claused bills;
• Delivery without presentation;
• Incorporation of charterparty terms;
• Jurisdiction and arbitration clauses.

Incorporation of a Charterparty Arbitration Clause

A bill of lading may refer to the terms of an underlying charterparty.

International Arbitration Law No. 4686 recognises a written arbitration agreement where the principal contract refers to a document containing an arbitration clause for the purpose of incorporating that clause into the contract.

In a bill-of-lading dispute, the tribunal or enforcement court may examine:

• Whether the relevant charterparty was identified;
• Whether the reference was sufficiently clear;
• Whether the arbitration clause was among the incorporated terms;
• Whether the bill holder received legally adequate notice;
• Whether the clause covers cargo claims;
• Whether the named institution and seat can be determined.

A general reference to “all terms” may generate more uncertainty than an express statement identifying the charterparty date, arbitration institution and seat.

Carrier Liability for Cargo Loss and Damage

Article 1178 requires the carrier to exercise the care expected from a prudent carrier in loading, stowing, handling, carrying, protecting, supervising and discharging the goods.

The carrier is responsible for loss, damage or delay occurring while the goods are within its custody, subject to statutory and contractual defences.

The custody period generally begins when the carrier receives the goods from the shipper or relevant authority and continues until delivery to the consignee, placement at the consignee’s disposal or delivery to a required authority or third party at the discharge port.

A cargo claimant should prove:

• Condition at loading;
• Condition at discharge;
• Nature and quantity of loss;
• Period of the carrier’s custody;
• Causal connection;
• Amount of damage.

Carrier Defences

Article 1182 establishes presumptions potentially benefiting the carrier where loss probably arose from specified events, including maritime dangers, war or public authority measures, strikes, acts of cargo interests, inherent vice, natural wastage, inadequate packaging and inadequate marks. These presumptions may be rebutted, and the carrier cannot rely on them where its own responsibility caused the relevant event.

The tribunal should avoid treating a listed defence as automatic immunity.

For example, alleging inherent vice does not eliminate the need to examine whether:

• Ventilation was adequate;
• Temperature instructions were followed;
• The voyage was prolonged;
• Cargo was stowed correctly;
• The vessel was cargo-worthy.

Notice of Cargo Damage

Article 1185 requires apparent loss or damage to be notified in writing no later than delivery.

Where the damage is not externally apparent, written notice within three continuous days after delivery is sufficient. If the parties jointly inspected the goods through the authorised procedure, separate notice may not be required.

Failure to give notice does not necessarily extinguish the claim automatically, but it creates presumptions that the goods were delivered as described and that established damage arose from a cause for which the carrier was not responsible. Those presumptions may be rebutted.

Cargo interests should therefore arrange surveys and written reservations immediately.

Delay Claims

Goods are considered delayed where they are not delivered within the expressly agreed period or, in the absence of an agreed period, within the time reasonably expected from a prudent carrier under the circumstances.

A delay claimant should prove:

• Required delivery time;
• Actual delivery date;
• Financial consequences;
• Foreseeability;
• Causation;
• Mitigation.

Loss of market claims may be difficult where price changes, resale arrangements and contractual exposure are not documented clearly.

Limitation of Carrier Liability

Under Article 1186, the carrier’s liability for cargo loss or damage is generally limited to the higher of:

• 666.67 Special Drawing Rights per package or unit; or
• Two Special Drawing Rights per kilogram of gross weight of the lost or damaged goods.

The rule does not apply in the same manner where the nature and value of the goods were declared before loading and recorded in the transport document. The Turkish-lira equivalent is calculated by reference to the Special Drawing Right value determined by the Central Bank for the applicable date.

The calculation may require decisions concerning:

• What constitutes a package;
• Containerised goods;
• Units listed in the bill of lading;
• Gross weight;
• Declared value;
• Separate claims for delay.

The limitation may also be lost where the legally required intentional or reckless conduct is proved.

Time Limits for Cargo Claims

Article 1188 establishes a one-year time bar for claims against the carrier arising from cargo loss, damage or delayed delivery.

The period begins on the date the goods were delivered or should have been delivered. A recourse claim may be brought later, but it must be commenced within 90 days after payment of the compensation or service of the claim against the recourse claimant. The original one-year period may be extended by an agreement made after the cause of action arose.

The broader statutory framework also provides a one-year limitation period for claims arising from ship leases, time charterparties, contracts of affreightment and bills of lading, subject to the special cargo time-bar rule.

A claimant should not assume that negotiation, survey activity or settlement correspondence automatically suspends or extends the period.

Commencement of the correct arbitration against the correct respondent within the applicable time is essential.

Shipbuilding Arbitration in Turkey

Shipbuilding disputes differ from charterparty and cargo disputes because they concern the creation and delivery of a vessel rather than its commercial employment.

Under Turkish law, a shipbuilding contract may principally be analysed through the Turkish Code of Obligations provisions governing contracts for work, together with maritime rules concerning vessels under construction, registration, ownership and security.

Article 470 defines a contract for work as an agreement under which the contractor undertakes to create a work and the employer undertakes to pay the agreed price. Article 471 requires performance with loyalty, care and compliance with the professional and technical standards expected from a prudent contractor.

Common Shipbuilding Disputes

Shipbuilding arbitration commonly concerns:

• Delay in construction;
• Milestone payments;
• Design changes;
• Change orders;
• Material escalation;
• Classification approval;
• Regulatory compliance;
• Buyer-supplied equipment;
• Weight or capacity;
• Speed and consumption;
• Sea-trial performance;
• Defects;
• Rejection;
• Cancellation;
• Refund guarantees;
• Title to the vessel under construction;
• Yard security rights.

The shipbuilding contract should regulate both the technical and legal consequences of each stage of construction.

Delayed Construction

Article 473 permits the employer, under specified conditions, to withdraw before the contractual delivery date where the contractor fails to begin on time, delays the work contrary to the agreement or clearly cannot complete the work on time for reasons not attributable to the employer. The employer may also require correction where it becomes apparent during construction that the work will be defective or non-compliant.

Shipbuilding contracts often supplement these statutory rights with:

• Permissible-delay clauses;
• Extension-of-time events;
• Delivery-date adjustments;
• Liquidated damages;
• Maximum delay periods;
• Cancellation rights.

The tribunal may need to distinguish between:

• Yard delay;
• Buyer-caused delay;
• Class-related delay;
• Force majeure;
• Change-order delay;
• Supply-chain disruption;
• Regulatory change.

A critical-path analysis may be required in larger cases.

Change Orders

Shipbuilding projects frequently evolve after signing.

The buyer may request:

• Different machinery;
• Increased capacity;
• New navigation systems;
• Alternative accommodation;
• Environmental modifications;
• Regulatory upgrades.

The contract should state:

• Who may request a change;
• Required form;
• Price adjustment;
• Delivery extension;
• Effect on guarantees;
• Approval procedure;
• Treatment of disputed changes.

A verbal instruction given at the yard may create major evidentiary problems if the contract requires signed change orders.

Technical Specifications and Classification

Shipbuilding contracts usually incorporate extensive technical specifications and classification requirements.

Disputes may arise over whether:

• Class approval satisfies the contract;
• Contractual specifications impose a higher standard;
• The vessel complies with flag-state requirements;
• Equipment is of the required make;
• Substitute materials were permitted;
• Drawings were approved;
• Buyer approval waived later objections.

Classification approval does not necessarily eliminate the builder’s contractual liability. The tribunal must compare the vessel with the specific contractual standard, not merely ask whether class certification was issued.

Sea Trials and Performance Guarantees

Sea trials may test:

• Speed;
• Fuel consumption;
• Deadweight;
• Endurance;
• Noise and vibration;
• Manoeuvrability;
• Machinery;
• Cargo systems.

The agreement should identify:

• Test conditions;
• Weather limits;
• Draft;
• Fuel specifications;
• Correction methodology;
• Retest rights;
• Tolerances;
• Liquidated-damages formulas;
• Rejection thresholds.

Minor underperformance may lead to a contractual price adjustment, while material failure may create rejection or cancellation rights.

Defects and Acceptance

Article 474 requires the employer to inspect the completed work as soon as reasonably possible after delivery and notify defects within an appropriate period. Either party may request an expert examination at its own cost.

Where the contractor is responsible for defects, Article 475 permits the employer, depending on severity and proportionality, to:

• Withdraw from the contract;
• Retain the work and request a price reduction;
• Require free repair;
• Claim damages under the general rules.

Acceptance may release the contractor from liability for apparent defects, while intentionally concealed or latent defects remain subject to special rules. Claims concerning defective non-immovable works are generally subject to the statutory periods stated in Article 478, including a two-year period and a longer period in cases of gross fault.

Shipbuilding contracts commonly provide contractual guarantee periods, but those clauses must be coordinated with mandatory statutory rights and limitation rules.

Vessel Under Construction Registry

The Turkish Commercial Code provides for a special registry for vessels under construction.

A vessel under construction may be registered at the owner’s request or where registration is required in connection with a mortgage, attachment or the shipyard’s right to secure its claim.

The Code permits a mortgage over a vessel under construction once the structure is sufficiently and permanently identifiable under the statutory conditions. The mortgage is created through a written agreement with notarised signatures or an agreement made before the registry, together with registration.

These provisions are especially relevant where construction is financed by a bank or where the buyer seeks security for advance payments.

Shipyard’s Mortgage Right

Article 1013 gives a shipyard the right to request registration of a mortgage over the vessel or structure for claims arising from construction or repair. Advance waiver of that right is invalid. A notation may also be entered to secure the right to request registration.

An arbitral tribunal may determine the underlying contractual amount owed to the shipyard.

Actual registration, priority and enforcement of the mortgage remain connected with the Turkish registry and compulsory enforcement system.

The shipbuilding arbitration clause should therefore preserve access to Turkish courts for protective and enforcement measures.

Refund Guarantees

Buyers commonly pay substantial instalments before delivery. A refund guarantee issued by a bank may secure repayment if the buyer validly cancels the contract.

Disputes may concern:

• Whether cancellation was valid;
• Whether the guarantee was independent;
• Whether the demand complied with formal requirements;
• Whether the guaranteed amount includes interest;
• Whether fraud or abuse is alleged;
• Whether the guarantee expired.

The arbitration clause in the shipbuilding contract does not automatically bind the guarantor.

The refund guarantee should contain a compatible dispute-resolution clause or identify an appropriate court.

Multiparty Maritime Disputes

A maritime loss may involve:

• Registered owner;
• Disponent owner;
• Time charterer;
• Voyage charterer;
• Shipper;
• Consignee;
• Bill-of-lading holder;
• Actual carrier;
• Terminal;
• Shipyard;
• Equipment supplier;
• Cargo insurer;
• Hull insurer;
• P&I club;
• Classification society.

Not every participant is automatically bound by the same arbitration clause.

The parties should map:

• Each contract;
• Each arbitration clause;
• Each claimant and respondent;
• Scope of each clause;
• Seat and institution;
• Governing law;
• Joinder or consolidation rules.

Commercial connection does not replace consent.

Cargo Insurance and Subrogation

After compensating cargo interests, an insurer may become subrogated to the insured’s rights against the carrier or another responsible party.

To commence arbitration, the insurer should prove:

• The policy;
• The insured loss;
• Payment;
• The insured’s underlying claim;
• The arbitration agreement governing that claim;
• The amount transferred through subrogation.

The insurer acquires no stronger substantive claim than the insured possessed and must comply with the applicable arbitration agreement and time bar.

Evidence in Maritime Arbitration

Important evidence may include:

• Charterparties;
• Bills of lading;
• Fixture recaps;
• Emails and instant messages;
• Statements of facts;
• Notices of readiness;
• Laytime calculations;
• Deck and engine logs;
• AIS data;
• Weather-routing reports;
• Cargo surveys;
• Stowage plans;
• Hatch-cover tests;
• Classification records;
• Shipyard progress reports;
• Drawings;
• Sea-trial reports;
• Payment records.

Electronic evidence should be preserved immediately after a dispute becomes foreseeable.

Ships and yards generate extensive digital data, but that information may be overwritten, distributed among several systems or held by third parties.

Expert Evidence

Maritime disputes may require experts in:

• Navigation;
• Marine engineering;
• Naval architecture;
• Cargo science;
• Meteorology;
• Port operations;
• Ship valuation;
• Quantum;
• Delay analysis;
• Classification practice.

The tribunal should define the expert issues narrowly.

A master mariner may address safe-port practice and navigation. A naval architect may analyse design and performance. An accountant may quantify loss. The tribunal remains responsible for contractual and legal interpretation.

Ship Arrest in Support of Arbitration

Ship arrest is often the most commercially important interim remedy in maritime disputes.

The Turkish Commercial Code defines maritime claims broadly. The list includes claims arising from vessel operation, personal injury, salvage, pollution, use or hire of a vessel, carriage of goods or passengers, cargo loss or damage, general average, towage, pilotage, ownership, possession, mortgages and vessel sale agreements.

Article 1353 provides that a ship may be provisionally arrested only to secure a recognised maritime claim. For such claims, a claimant may not seek a different injunction merely to prevent the vessel from sailing.

The existence of an arbitration clause or foreign jurisdiction clause does not prevent a competent Turkish court from arresting a vessel in Türkiye to secure the maritime claim. Turkish courts may grant arrest even where the merits will be decided by foreign arbitrators or under foreign law.

Where arbitration has already begun, the arrest application remains within the authority of the Turkish court identified by the maritime provisions.

Execution of the Arrest Order

A creditor obtaining a ship-arrest order must request its execution from the competent enforcement office within three working days from the date of the order. Otherwise, the arrest order automatically lapses.

Because ships may leave port quickly, the application should be prepared before the vessel arrives.

The claimant should gather:

• Evidence of the maritime claim;
• Arbitration agreement;
• Vessel identification;
• Ownership information;
• Port or anchorage information;
• Claim calculation;
• Required security;
• Turkish translations where necessary.

A separate analysis is required to determine which vessel may be arrested. The Code regulates arrest of the ship connected with the claim and, in defined circumstances, another ship owned by the liable person.

Interim Measures under International Arbitration Law

International Arbitration Law also preserves access to courts for interim injunctions and attachments before or during arbitration.

A tribunal may issue interim relief between the parties, but it cannot issue a measure requiring compulsory enforcement by public authorities or directly binding third parties. If a party does not comply, the opposing party may request court assistance.

Where a court measure is obtained before commencement of arbitration under the International Arbitration Law framework, the claimant must ordinarily commence arbitration within the statutory period stated in Article 10. Maritime claimants must coordinate that requirement with the special ship-arrest provisions and the particular terms of the court order.

ISTAC Maritime Arbitration

ISTAC can administer maritime disputes where the parties select the ISTAC Arbitration Rules.

It may be suitable where:

• The dispute has a Turkish connection;
• Istanbul is chosen as the seat;
• The parties require English-language proceedings;
• Turkish ship-arrest assistance may be required;
• The parties want institutional appointment and administration;
• The dispute involves Turkish shipyards or ports.

ISTAC offers institutional arbitration for domestic and international parties, permits party selection of experienced arbitrators and supports flexible proceedings, including online hearings.

A maritime clause should nevertheless be tailored rather than copied without modification.

Sample Maritime Arbitration Clause

“Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, including its formation, existence, validity, interpretation, performance, breach, termination or enforcement, shall be finally resolved by arbitration administered by the Istanbul Arbitration Centre in accordance with the ISTAC Arbitration Rules.

The seat of arbitration shall be Istanbul, Türkiye. The tribunal shall consist of three arbitrators. The language of the arbitration shall be English. This Agreement and the arbitration agreement contained in this clause shall be governed by Turkish law.

The tribunal may determine disputes concerning hire, freight, off-hire, laytime, demurrage, seaworthiness, cargo loss or damage, delay, vessel performance, shipbuilding delay, defects, guarantees, termination and damages.

Nothing in this clause prevents a party from applying to a competent court for ship arrest, interim attachment, preservation of evidence or another protective or conservatory measure. Such an application shall not constitute a waiver of arbitration.”

For bills of lading, the clause or incorporation wording should identify the relevant charterparty and arbitration agreement expressly.

Setting Aside Turkish-Seated Maritime Awards

A Turkish-seated international award is not subject to an ordinary appeal on the factual or legal merits.

It may be set aside only on limited grounds, such as:

• Invalid arbitration agreement;
• Improper tribunal constitution;
• Excess of jurisdiction;
• Material procedural violation;
• Denial of equal treatment;
• Non-arbitrability;
• Conflict with public policy.

The court should not reconsider whether the tribunal calculated demurrage correctly or preferred one marine expert over another merely because the losing party disagrees with the outcome.

Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Maritime Awards

A foreign maritime award may be recognised and enforced in Türkiye under the New York Convention and Articles 60 to 63 of Law No. 5718.

Law No. 5718 permits enforcement of a foreign arbitral award that is final, enforceable or binding on the parties. The applicant must submit the arbitration agreement, award and certified translations.

Enforcement may be refused only on limited grounds, including:

• Absence or invalidity of the arbitration agreement;
• Lack of notice;
• Denial of the opportunity to present the case;
• Irregular tribunal constitution;
• Excess of jurisdiction;
• Non-arbitrability;
• Public-policy conflict;
• The award not being binding or having been set aside.

The New York Convention establishes common international standards intended to prevent discrimination against foreign and non-domestic arbitral awards.

Where a Turkish court previously arrested a vessel for the same maritime claim, the Code also contains a specific jurisdictional provision concerning enforcement of the resulting foreign court or arbitral award where the vessel or substitute security remains within the relevant jurisdiction.

Practical Checklist for Charterparty Arbitration

Before commencing proceedings, the claimant should determine:

• Which charterparty applies;
• Whether amendments or fixture recaps modify it;
• Which party is owner, disponent owner or charterer;
• Whether the claim concerns hire, freight or damages;
• Which notices were required;
• Whether supporting documents were submitted in time;
• Whether the claim is time-barred;
• Whether the vessel or another asset can be arrested;
• Where the award will be enforced.

Practical Checklist for Cargo Arbitration

Cargo interests should preserve:

• Original bill of lading;
• Commercial invoice;
• Packing list;
• Survey reports;
• Delivery and tally records;
• Written damage notice;
• Photographs;
• Temperature data;
• Insurance payment records;
• Evidence of title and standing;
• Evidence identifying the carrier;
• Arbitration agreement;
• Limitation calculation.

Practical Checklist for Shipbuilding Arbitration

The buyer or shipyard should review:

• Contract and technical specifications;
• Construction schedule;
• Milestone-payment records;
• Change orders;
• Class correspondence;
• Progress reports;
• Delay notices;
• Sea-trial results;
• Acceptance protocol;
• Defect notices;
• Refund guarantees;
• Registry records;
• Mortgages and security;
• Expert evidence;
• Cancellation requirements.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can charterparty disputes be arbitrated in Türkiye?

Yes. Commercial disputes concerning ship leases, time charters, voyage charters, hire, freight, off-hire, laytime and demurrage are generally suitable for arbitration where a valid arbitration agreement exists.

Can a bill of lading incorporate a charterparty arbitration clause?

Potentially. Turkish arbitration law recognises incorporation by reference where a contract refers to a document containing an arbitration clause for the purpose of making it part of the agreement. The wording and notice to the bill holder must be examined carefully.

How long does a cargo claimant have to commence proceedings?

Cargo claims for loss, damage or delay are generally subject to a one-year time bar beginning on delivery or the date on which delivery should have occurred.

When must cargo damage be reported?

Apparent damage should be reported no later than delivery. Non-apparent damage should generally be reported in writing within three continuous days after delivery.

Can a carrier limit liability?

Yes. Turkish maritime law generally limits cargo liability by reference to Special Drawing Rights per package or kilogram, subject to declared value and loss-of-limitation rules.

Can a ship be arrested in Türkiye when the merits are subject to foreign arbitration?

Yes. A competent Turkish court may grant ship arrest to secure a maritime claim even where a foreign court or arbitral tribunal will decide the merits.

How quickly must a ship-arrest order be enforced?

The creditor must request execution within three working days from the date of the arrest order, or the order lapses automatically.

Can the arbitral tribunal arrest the vessel directly?

No. A tribunal cannot directly exercise Turkish compulsory enforcement power or bind port, registry and enforcement authorities. A Turkish court and enforcement office are required.

Are shipbuilding disputes governed by maritime law or contract-for-work rules?

Both may be relevant. The contractual construction obligations are commonly analysed under the Turkish Code of Obligations provisions concerning contracts for work, while vessel registration, ownership, construction mortgages and shipyard security are governed by maritime provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code.

Can a buyer reject a defective vessel?

Depending on the contract and seriousness of the defect, the buyer may have rights to reject, reduce the price, require repair or claim damages. Turkish contract-for-work rules recognise these remedies subject to their statutory conditions.

Can a mortgage be created over a vessel under construction?

Yes. The Turkish Commercial Code allows registration and mortgaging of a sufficiently identifiable vessel under construction under the applicable formal and registry requirements.

Does the shipyard have security for unpaid construction costs?

The shipyard has a statutory right to request registration of a mortgage for claims arising from construction or repair, and advance waiver of this right is invalid.

Can a foreign maritime award be enforced in Türkiye?

Yes, subject to the New York Convention, Law No. 5718 and the limited statutory refusal grounds.

Conclusion

Maritime arbitration in Turkey provides an effective forum for charterparty, cargo and shipbuilding disputes, but its success depends on careful coordination between arbitration law, maritime law and enforcement procedure.

Charterparty disputes require correct classification of the contract.

A ship lease transfers use and possession under one legal structure. A time charter allocates commercial management to the charterer while technical management remains with the provider. A voyage charter concerns carriage for freight during an agreed voyage.

Each form produces different disputes concerning seaworthiness, hire, freight, operational expenses, off-hire, laytime, demurrage and redelivery.

Cargo arbitration requires immediate attention to evidence and deadlines.

The claimant must identify the correct carrier, prove standing under the bill of lading, document the condition of the cargo and comply with notice and time-bar requirements.

Carrier liability may be subject to statutory defences and Special Drawing Right limitations. These limitations should be calculated carefully rather than treated as an approximate ceiling.

Shipbuilding arbitration requires a different approach.

The tribunal may need to examine detailed technical specifications, class requirements, delay events, variations, sea trials, defects and acceptance. Turkish contract-for-work rules may provide rights to repair, price reduction, termination and damages, while Turkish maritime law governs registration and security over the vessel under construction.

Interim protection is particularly important in maritime disputes.

A final award may have little commercial value if the vessel leaves the jurisdiction and the debtor has no other identifiable assets. Turkish law therefore permits ship arrest for recognised maritime claims even where the merits are subject to domestic or foreign arbitration.

The claimant must act quickly, identify the vessel, prepare evidence and execute the arrest order within the statutory period.

The arbitration clause should be drafted across the entire contractual chain.

A charterparty clause does not necessarily bind every bill-of-lading holder. A shipbuilding clause does not automatically bind a refund-guarantee bank, equipment supplier or classification society. Each person intended to participate should be bound through a valid and compatible arbitration agreement.

A well-drafted clause should identify the institution, seat, language, number of arbitrators, governing law and right to seek court protection.

Once the dispute arises, counsel should preserve logs, reports, correspondence, surveys and electronic vessel data immediately.

When these steps are taken properly, maritime arbitration can provide technical expertise, procedural flexibility, confidentiality and an internationally enforceable resolution of complex shipping disputes.

Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Maritime disputes depend on the charterparty, bill of lading, shipbuilding contract, arbitration clause, governing law, vessel flag, cargo documents, security interests, applicable conventions, arbitral seat and intended enforcement jurisdiction. Case-specific Turkish maritime and arbitration advice should be obtained before commencing arbitration, arresting a vessel or enforcing an award.