ISTAC Arbitration in Turkey: Rules, Procedure, Costs and Advantages

ISTAC arbitration has become an increasingly important method for resolving domestic and international commercial disputes connected with Turkey. The Istanbul Arbitration Centre, commonly known as ISTAC, provides institutional arbitration and alternative dispute resolution services for Turkish companies, foreign investors, multinational businesses, public authorities and individuals.

The Centre was established under Istanbul Arbitration Centre Law No. 6570. The legislation created ISTAC as a legal entity governed by private law to administer the resolution of disputes, including disputes containing a foreign element, through arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution methods.

ISTAC does not decide disputes itself. The merits are determined by an independent sole arbitrator or arbitral tribunal. ISTAC’s institutional bodies and Secretariat administer the proceedings, facilitate communications, supervise appointments where necessary, calculate advances on costs and support the efficient conduct of the arbitration.

The Centre can administer both domestic and international disputes. Parties do not need to be members of any chamber, professional organisation or business association to use its services. The growing use of the institution is reflected in ISTAC’s announcement that it received 263 new applications in 2025.

This article explains the ISTAC Arbitration Rules, the procedure for commencing a case, the appointment of arbitrators, evidence and hearings, Fast Track Arbitration, emergency arbitrator proceedings, arbitration costs, advantages, possible risks and the enforcement of ISTAC arbitral awards.

What Is ISTAC Arbitration?

ISTAC arbitration is a form of institutional arbitration conducted under the rules of the Istanbul Arbitration Centre.

In institutional arbitration, the dispute is determined by arbitrators, but the administrative process is managed by a permanent arbitration institution. This differs from ad hoc arbitration, where the parties and arbitrators organise the proceedings without the administrative involvement of an institution.

ISTAC’s administrative framework can assist with:

• Receipt and transmission of claims and defences;
• Constitution of the arbitral tribunal;
• Appointment of arbitrators where the agreed mechanism fails;
• Challenges against arbitrators;
• Communication between the parties and tribunal;
• Calculation and collection of advances on costs;
• Procedural administration;
• Emergency arbitrator applications;
• Fast Track Arbitration;
• Online hearings;
• Transmission and certification of awards.

The ISTAC Board of Arbitration administers the application of the rules but does not itself resolve the merits of disputes. The published institutional rules also provide that the Board operates independently in carrying out its arbitration-related functions.

Which Disputes Can Be Submitted to ISTAC?

ISTAC may be selected for a broad range of commercial and contractual disputes, provided that the dispute is capable of settlement by arbitration under the applicable law.

Common examples include disputes arising from:

• International sale of goods agreements;
• Construction and infrastructure projects;
• Energy supply and energy investment contracts;
• Share purchase and shareholders’ agreements;
• Joint ventures;
• Distribution and agency agreements;
• Franchise contracts;
• Technology and software agreements;
• Licensing arrangements;
• Banking and finance transactions;
• Insurance and reinsurance agreements;
• Transportation and logistics contracts;
• Maritime trade;
• Manufacturing and supply arrangements;
• Public procurement and government contracts;
• Real estate development contracts, subject to arbitrability limitations.

Where Turkey is the seat and the dispute contains a foreign element, International Arbitration Law No. 4686 will generally provide the procedural legal framework. The law also applies in certain cases where its application is selected by the parties or arbitral tribunal. It does not permit arbitration of disputes concerning rights in rem over immovable property situated in Turkey or matters that are not subject to the parties’ free disposition.

The fact that mandatory provisions of Turkish law may apply does not automatically make a dispute non-arbitrable. However, parties should conduct a transaction-specific arbitrability analysis, particularly in disputes involving employment, competition, insolvency, intellectual property registrations, public law or immovable property rights.

How Do Parties Choose ISTAC Arbitration?

ISTAC arbitration is based on consent. The parties must have an arbitration agreement referring their dispute to ISTAC or the ISTAC Arbitration Rules.

The arbitration agreement may be:

• A clause contained in the principal contract;
• A separate arbitration agreement;
• An agreement concluded after a dispute has arisen;
• A written agreement incorporated through another contractual document.

The official ISTAC model clause states that disputes arising from or connected with the contract will be finally resolved by arbitration under the Istanbul Arbitration Centre Arbitration Rules. ISTAC also recommends that parties consider specifying the seat, language, number of arbitrators and law applicable to the merits. The model clause further allows the parties to exclude the Emergency Arbitrator Rules when they do not wish those rules to apply.

A basic clause may be drafted as follows:

“Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this agreement shall be finally resolved by arbitration under the Istanbul Arbitration Centre Arbitration Rules.”

For international contracts, a more detailed clause is usually preferable.

Recommended ISTAC Arbitration Clause

A comprehensive international clause may state:

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

The seat of arbitration shall be Istanbul, Turkey. The tribunal shall consist of three arbitrators. The language of the arbitration shall be English. The substantive law governing the agreement shall be Turkish law. The arbitration agreement contained in this clause shall be governed by Turkish law. The ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator Rules shall apply.”

The appropriate wording should be adapted to the value, complexity and international structure of the transaction. A sole arbitrator may be more proportionate for medium-sized claims, whereas a three-member tribunal may be preferred for complex construction, energy, corporate or high-value commercial disputes.

Matters to Specify in an ISTAC Clause

The official model clause is intentionally concise. However, parties should consider addressing several additional matters.

Seat of Arbitration

The seat determines the procedural arbitration law and the courts that exercise supervisory jurisdiction.

Where Istanbul, Turkey is selected as the seat of an international arbitration, Law No. 4686 will generally govern the arbitration if the statutory foreign-element requirement is satisfied. Turkish courts will then have jurisdiction over matters such as judicial assistance, certain interim measures and applications to set aside the award.

The seat is legally distinct from the physical hearing venue. An arbitration seated in Istanbul may conduct hearings in another country or through video conference without changing the juridical seat.

Language

The parties may select Turkish, English or another appropriate language for the proceedings, subject to mandatory legal requirements.

The choice should reflect:

• The contract language;
• The language of correspondence;
• The language spoken by witnesses;
• The governing law;
• The available pool of arbitrators;
• Translation and interpretation costs.

Number of Arbitrators

The parties may generally choose a sole arbitrator or three arbitrators.

A sole arbitrator usually reduces fees and simplifies scheduling. A three-member tribunal can provide broader legal and sectoral expertise but will ordinarily increase the arbitrator fees and administrative complexity.

Governing Law

The parties should distinguish between:

• The law governing the principal contract;
• The law governing the arbitration agreement;
• The procedural law determined by the seat.

Choosing ISTAC does not automatically mean that Turkish substantive law governs the contract. The parties may select another substantive law while choosing Istanbul as the seat and ISTAC as the administering institution.

How to Commence an ISTAC Arbitration

An ISTAC arbitration begins when the claimant submits a Request for Arbitration or a full Statement of Claim to the Secretariat.

The claimant should submit:

• The names and contact details of the parties;
• The arbitration agreement;
• A description of the dispute;
• The factual and legal basis of the claim;
• The relief requested;
• The amount in dispute, where quantifiable;
• Relevant contractual documents;
• Available supporting evidence;
• The claimant’s position on the number of arbitrators;
• The nomination or proposal of an arbitrator where applicable;
• Proof of payment of the registration fee.

The official ISTAC filing guideline allows the claimant to submit a Request for Arbitration or Statement of Claim, together with the arbitration clause, to the Secretariat. Where three arbitrators are contemplated, the claimant may nominate a co-arbitrator; where a sole arbitrator is contemplated, the claimant may identify its preferred candidate.

A carefully prepared Request for Arbitration is important because it defines the initial scope of the proceedings and places the respondent on notice of the dispute. Even where the rules permit a brief request, the claimant should identify the claims and requested relief with sufficient clarity.

The Respondent’s Answer

After the case is registered, the Secretariat transmits the Request for Arbitration and accompanying documents to the respondent.

According to ISTAC’s current procedural guideline, the respondent has 30 days to submit its Answer to the Request for Arbitration. The respondent may also submit its Statement of Defence and supporting evidence during this stage, although the procedural structure may permit further submissions depending on the directions of the tribunal.

The Answer should address:

• The existence and validity of the arbitration agreement;
• Jurisdictional objections;
• The respondent’s position on the facts;
• Defences against each claim;
• Any counterclaims;
• Set-off arguments;
• The amount in dispute;
• The number and method of appointment of arbitrators;
• The respondent’s arbitrator nomination;
• The seat, language and governing law where disputed.

Jurisdictional objections should be raised at the earliest appropriate stage. A respondent that participates without timely objection may face arguments that it has waived the relevant procedural or jurisdictional complaint.

Constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal

The dispute may be decided by a sole arbitrator or an arbitral tribunal, depending on the arbitration agreement and the applicable rules.

Where three arbitrators are selected, each party commonly nominates one arbitrator, and the two party-appointed arbitrators select the presiding arbitrator. Where the agreed appointment mechanism fails, the ISTAC Board of Arbitration may make the necessary appointment.

In selecting an arbitrator, parties should consider:

• Independence and impartiality;
• Availability;
• Language skills;
• Experience with the governing law;
• Arbitration experience;
• Sector-specific expertise;
• Nationality;
• Potential conflicts of interest;
• Ability to manage the case efficiently.

A party should not nominate an arbitrator merely because the individual is expected to favour its position. Arbitrators must remain independent adjudicators and must disclose circumstances capable of giving rise to justified doubts regarding their impartiality.

Independence, Impartiality and Challenges

The integrity of institutional arbitration depends on the independence and impartiality of arbitrators.

Before accepting an appointment, an arbitrator should disclose relevant personal, professional and financial relationships involving:

• The parties;
• Their shareholders or parent companies;
• Counsel;
• Other arbitrators;
• Experts;
• The subject matter of the dispute.

A party may challenge an arbitrator where circumstances give rise to justified doubts regarding independence or impartiality or where the arbitrator lacks qualifications agreed by the parties.

However, a challenge should not be used as a tactical instrument to delay the proceedings. The challenging party should act promptly after becoming aware of the relevant circumstances and provide specific evidence rather than general dissatisfaction with procedural decisions.

Transmission of the File and Advance on Costs

After the tribunal has been constituted and the required initial advance has been paid, the Secretariat transmits the case file to the sole arbitrator or arbitral tribunal.

The advance on costs is intended to cover institutional administrative costs, arbitrator fees and certain arbitration-related expenses. The published ISTAC cost rules permit the advance to be adjusted during the proceedings where the amount in dispute, complexity or expected expenses change. The rules also provide for reimbursement of amounts exceeding the final costs fixed by the institution.

Failure to pay a required advance may delay the transmission of the file or affect the continuation of claims. Where one party fails to pay its share, the other party may face a strategic decision about whether to cover that share to allow the proceedings or a counterclaim to continue.

Terms of Reference and Procedural Timetable

After receiving the file, the tribunal ordinarily organises the proceedings through an initial case management process.

The procedural framework may include:

• Terms of Reference;
• A procedural timetable;
• Dates for statements of claim and defence;
• Counterclaim submissions;
• Document production;
• Witness statements;
• Expert reports;
• Preliminary objections;
• Hearing dates;
• Post-hearing briefs;
• The anticipated closure of proceedings.

A procedural timetable increases predictability and helps prevent unnecessary delay. ISTAC materials describe the timetable as a mechanism for establishing submission dates, hearing dates and other procedural matters after consultation with the parties.

Parties should treat the timetable seriously. A failure to submit evidence or objections within the established period may result in exclusion, additional costs or loss of the opportunity to rely on the relevant material.

Written Submissions and Evidence

The tribunal determines the appropriate procedure, subject to the parties’ agreement, the ISTAC Rules and mandatory provisions of the applicable arbitration law.

The parties will ordinarily submit:

• Statements of claim;
• Statements of defence;
• Replies and rejoinders;
• Counterclaims and responses;
• Documentary evidence;
• Witness statements;
• Legal authorities;
• Expert reports;
• Quantum calculations.

In commercial arbitration, documentary evidence is often decisive. Parties should preserve contracts, amendments, invoices, delivery records, payment records, correspondence, notices of breach, meeting minutes, technical reports and electronic communications.

A party should avoid submitting large volumes of irrelevant documents. An effective evidentiary presentation links each document to a specific factual allegation, contractual obligation or requested remedy.

Document Production

International arbitration does not necessarily involve the extensive discovery procedures found in certain common-law jurisdictions.

The tribunal may establish a focused document production process directed at specific, relevant and material categories of documents. A requesting party should identify the requested material with reasonable precision and explain why it is relevant to the outcome of the dispute.

The opposing party may object on grounds such as:

• Lack of relevance;
• Excessive breadth;
• Legal privilege;
• Confidentiality;
• Disproportionate burden;
• Absence of possession or control;
• Commercial sensitivity.

The tribunal may order protective measures where confidential or commercially sensitive records are produced.

Witnesses and Experts

ISTAC arbitration may involve factual witnesses and party-appointed or tribunal-appointed experts.

Witness evidence may address:

• Contract negotiations;
• Performance;
• Delays;
• Defects;
• Instructions;
• Payments;
• Termination;
• Commercial practices;
• Loss and damage.

Expert evidence may be required in construction, engineering, accounting, valuation, energy, software, intellectual property or financial disputes.

Experts should explain their methodology, assumptions, underlying data and conclusions. An expert report that merely supports the appointing party’s position without independent analysis may receive limited weight.

Hearings and Online Proceedings

The tribunal may decide the case following an oral hearing or, where appropriate and permitted, on the documents.

ISTAC has published specific Online Hearing Rules and Procedures. A hearing may be held through video conference or teleconference at the request of a party or where the tribunal considers it appropriate. The tribunal may determine the software, security arrangements, access information and technical infrastructure after consulting the parties.

The online hearing framework addresses:

• Identification of participants;
• Confidentiality and security;
• Technical responsibilities;
• Presentation of documents;
• The right to be heard;
• Examination of witnesses and experts;
• Interpretation;
• Recording and transcription.

The rules prohibit unauthorised audio or visual recording. They also require the tribunal to make reasonable efforts to protect each party’s opportunity to participate and present its case.

Online hearings can reduce travel and accommodation expenses, especially where parties, counsel, arbitrators and experts are located in different countries. However, complex witness examination may still justify a physical or hybrid hearing.

Fast Track Arbitration under ISTAC Rules

ISTAC Fast Track Arbitration is designed for the simplified and rapid resolution of lower-value disputes.

As of August 2026, ISTAC’s official website states that the Fast Track Arbitration Rules apply to disputes where the value of the claims does not exceed TRY 5,000,000. The procedure uses a sole arbitrator and aims to produce a final award within three months.

The claimant commences Fast Track Arbitration by submitting a full Statement of Claim, supporting evidence and the arbitration clause. The claimant may also propose a sole arbitrator. The respondent submits its Statement of Defence and evidence within 15 days. The arbitrator may hold a hearing or decide the case on the documents.

The principal features include:

• A sole arbitrator;
• Shorter submission periods;
• A simplified procedural structure;
• The possibility of a documents-only decision;
• A three-month award target;
• Lower arbitrator costs than a three-member tribunal;
• Greater cost and time predictability.

Fast Track Arbitration may be particularly useful for payment disputes, supply contracts, service agreements, smaller construction claims and disputes requiring a commercially rapid decision.

The parties should verify the applicable threshold and version of the rules when drafting a contract or commencing proceedings because institutional monetary thresholds and fee scales may be revised.

ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator

A party may require urgent protection before the arbitral tribunal has been constituted.

Examples include a need to:

• Preserve evidence;
• Prevent the transfer of assets;
• Protect confidential information;
• Stop the disposal of goods;
• Maintain the contractual status quo;
• Prevent irreparable operational harm;
• Secure property relevant to the dispute.

The ISTAC Emergency Arbitrator Rules apply to qualifying applications submitted before the case file has been transmitted to the sole arbitrator or arbitral tribunal. A party applying for emergency relief is not initially required to submit the full Request for Arbitration, Statement of Claim or defence submissions.

The emergency arbitrator is appointed within two working days after receipt of the application, and the decision is rendered within seven days. The decision is binding on parties that consented to the Emergency Arbitrator Rules.

The application should explain:

• The urgent circumstances;
• The relief requested;
• The legal and contractual basis;
• The risk of harm;
• Why the regular tribunal cannot be awaited;
• Any security offered;
• The underlying arbitration agreement.

An emergency application does not necessarily prevent a party from requesting judicial interim protection. Under the Turkish International Arbitration Law, applying to a competent court for an interim measure or interim attachment before or during arbitration is not incompatible with the arbitration agreement.

ISTAC Arbitration Costs

The cost of an ISTAC arbitration depends primarily on:

• The amount in dispute;
• Whether there is a sole arbitrator or three-member tribunal;
• The complexity and duration of the proceedings;
• Hearing expenses;
• Expert costs;
• Translation and interpretation;
• Legal representation;
• Travel and accommodation;
• Applicable taxes.

The institutional costs principally include:

1. The registration fee;
2. Administrative costs;
3. Arbitrator fees;
4. Arbitrator expenses;
5. Additional case-specific expenses.

Current Registration and Administrative Costs

According to ISTAC’s official fee scale available in August 2026, the registration fee is TL 1,000. Administrative costs are calculated through a progressive scale linked to the amount in dispute. For claims up to TL 1,000,000, the published administrative cost rate is 1.6%. For higher-value disputes, the scale applies a fixed base amount plus a declining percentage applicable within the relevant band.

The published administrative cost bands are:

• Up to TL 1,000,000: 1.6%;
• TL 1,000,001–5,000,000: TL 16,000 plus 1%;
• TL 5,000,001–25,000,000: TL 56,000 plus 0.7%;
• TL 25,000,001–75,000,000: TL 196,000 plus 0.5%;
• TL 75,000,001–200,000,000: TL 446,000 plus 0.4%;
• TL 200,000,001–1,000,000,000: TL 946,000 plus 0.06%;
• TL 1,000,000,000–3,000,000,000: TL 1,426,000 plus 0.03%;
• More than TL 3,000,000,000: TL 2,026,000.

The percentage in the relevant band is applied under the progressive structure of the official scale. The current institutional calculator should be consulted for a case-specific estimate.

Arbitrator Fees

Arbitrator fees are also calculated by reference to the amount in dispute and the number of arbitrators.

For claims up to TL 1,000,000, the current scale provides:

• Sole arbitrator: 5%;
• Three-member tribunal: 7%.

For higher-value disputes, fixed base amounts and declining percentages apply. The official scale states that arbitrator fees may not be lower than TL 5,000.

A three-member tribunal will ordinarily cost more than a sole arbitrator. Parties should therefore consider whether the dispute’s value and complexity genuinely require three arbitrators.

Costs Not Included in the Basic Scale

The institutional scale should not be confused with the entire cost of the dispute.

Additional expenses may include:

• Lawyers’ fees;
• Expert fees;
• Witness expenses;
• Translation costs;
• Interpretation;
• Hearing-room services;
• Court fees for interim relief or setting-aside proceedings;
• Enforcement expenses;
• Taxes;
• Travel and accommodation.

The tribunal will ordinarily address the allocation of arbitration costs in the award, taking into account the applicable rules, outcome and conduct of the parties.

Advantages of ISTAC Arbitration

Institutional Administration

ISTAC provides an established administrative framework rather than requiring parties to create every procedural mechanism themselves.

The Secretariat facilitates communications, receives submissions, administers payments and supports the constitution of the tribunal. This reduces the risk that the arbitration will be delayed by a failed appointment mechanism or uncertainty over administrative issues.

Party Autonomy

The parties may choose:

• The seat;
• The language;
• The governing law;
• The number of arbitrators;
• Arbitrator qualifications;
• The scope of arbitration;
• Certain procedural arrangements.

This flexibility is particularly valuable in cross-border contracts involving parties from different legal systems.

Specialist Arbitrators

Parties may appoint arbitrators with expertise relevant to the dispute.

A complex construction dispute may benefit from an arbitrator experienced in FIDIC contracts and delay claims. An energy dispute may require familiarity with energy regulation and long-term supply agreements. A corporate dispute may benefit from expertise in shareholders’ agreements, valuation and company law.

Speed

The use of procedural timetables, sole arbitrators, Fast Track Arbitration and emergency arbitrators can result in a more controlled timetable than ordinary litigation.

The current Fast Track Rules target resolution within three months for claims not exceeding TL 5,000,000, while emergency decisions may be obtained within seven days following appointment procedures.

Cost Predictability

ISTAC publishes its registration, administrative and arbitrator fee scales. This allows parties to estimate a significant part of the arbitration costs before commencing proceedings.

International Enforceability

An ISTAC award rendered in an international arbitration may benefit from the international recognition and enforcement framework of the 1958 New York Convention.

Turkey is a contracting state to the Convention. Enforcement abroad will depend on the country where the debtor’s assets are located and the limited refusal grounds available under the Convention.

Privacy

Arbitration proceedings are not generally open to the public in the same manner as ordinary court hearings. This may be valuable for disputes involving trade secrets, prices, customer information, technical processes or sensitive shareholder matters.

However, parties should include an express confidentiality clause where strict confidentiality is commercially important. Confidentiality may need exceptions for regulatory disclosures, professional advisers, enforcement and setting-aside proceedings.

Online Hearing Capability

ISTAC’s online hearing framework allows parties, arbitrators, witnesses and experts to participate remotely. The rules regulate security, confidentiality, witness examination, interpretation and recording.

Potential Disadvantages and Risks

ISTAC arbitration is not automatically suitable for every contract.

Potential disadvantages include:

• Upfront advances on costs;
• Arbitrator and institutional fees;
• Limited appeal on the merits;
• Complexity in multi-party disputes;
• Difficulties binding non-signatories;
• Enforcement proceedings where the debtor does not comply voluntarily;
• Translation expenses in international cases;
• The possibility of parallel court and arbitration proceedings;
• Challenges arising from defective arbitration clauses.

A small, straightforward domestic debt claim may sometimes be handled more efficiently through enforcement or court proceedings. Conversely, arbitration may be especially valuable where neutrality, technical expertise, confidentiality or international enforceability is important.

Setting Aside an ISTAC Award in Turkey

An ISTAC award is final and binding between the parties, but an award seated in Turkey may be challenged through a limited setting-aside action.

Under Article 15 of Law No. 4686, potential grounds include:

• Incapacity of a party;
• Invalidity of the arbitration agreement;
• Improper constitution of the tribunal;
• Failure to issue the award within the permitted period;
• An unlawful jurisdictional decision;
• Excess of authority;
• Material procedural irregularity;
• Violation of equality;
• Non-arbitrability;
• Conflict with Turkish public policy.

The setting-aside action is not a full appeal on the facts or legal merits. Turkish courts should not reconsider the case merely because the losing party disagrees with the tribunal’s contractual interpretation or assessment of evidence. The statutory filing period is generally 30 days following notification of the award or a relevant post-award decision.

Enforcement of ISTAC Awards

The applicable enforcement mechanism depends on the seat of arbitration and the country in which enforcement is sought.

Where an ISTAC arbitration is seated in Turkey, the award is treated as a Turkish arbitral award and will be subject to the enforcement and setting-aside regime of Turkish arbitration law.

Where enforcement is sought in another country, the New York Convention may apply if the relevant requirements are satisfied. The enforcing court may refuse recognition only on limited grounds, including invalidity of the arbitration agreement, lack of notice, inability to present the case, excess of jurisdiction, procedural irregularity, non-arbitrability or public policy.

Before commencing arbitration, a claimant should identify where the respondent’s assets are located. Winning an award has limited commercial value if the debtor has no identifiable or enforceable assets.

Common Mistakes in ISTAC Arbitration Clauses

Parties should avoid:

• Using optional language such as “may refer to arbitration”;
• Referring simultaneously to ISTAC and state courts without defining their roles;
• Naming the institution incorrectly;
• Failing to specify the seat;
• Confusing ISTAC with the seat of arbitration;
• Using inconsistent clauses in connected contracts;
• Naming an individual arbitrator who may later be unavailable;
• Creating an even-numbered tribunal;
• Failing to address the language;
• Ignoring emergency relief;
• Using a clause not signed by an authorised representative;
• Failing to include guarantors or related entities expected to be bound.

The clearest approach is to begin with ISTAC’s model clause and adapt it carefully to the transaction.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is ISTAC only available to Turkish companies?

No. ISTAC may administer disputes involving Turkish or foreign parties. The Centre was established to resolve both domestic disputes and disputes containing a foreign element.

Can an ISTAC arbitration be conducted in English?

Yes. The parties may select English as the language of arbitration in their clause.

Must the seat be Istanbul?

No. ISTAC is the administering institution, while the parties may select the legal seat separately. However, Istanbul is commonly chosen in contracts connected with Turkey.

How long does the respondent have to answer?

Under ISTAC’s standard procedural guideline, the respondent has 30 days to submit an Answer to the Request for Arbitration. In Fast Track Arbitration, the defence period is 15 days.

What is the current Fast Track Arbitration threshold?

As of August 2026, ISTAC states that the Fast Track Arbitration Rules apply to disputes where the claims do not exceed TL 5,000,000.

How quickly can an emergency decision be obtained?

The emergency arbitrator is appointed within two working days, and the decision is rendered within seven days under the published ISTAC framework.

How much does ISTAC arbitration cost?

The cost depends mainly on the amount in dispute and whether a sole arbitrator or three-member tribunal is selected. The current registration fee is TL 1,000, while administrative costs and arbitrator fees are calculated through the published progressive scales.

Can hearings be held online?

Yes. ISTAC has specific rules allowing hearings and meetings to be conducted by video conference or teleconference.

Can the losing party appeal an ISTAC award on the merits?

There is generally no ordinary merits appeal. A party may seek setting aside only on the limited statutory grounds established by the law of the seat.

Conclusion

ISTAC arbitration offers a modern institutional framework for resolving domestic and international commercial disputes connected with Turkey.

Its principal features include institutional administration, party autonomy, specialist arbitrators, published cost scales, Fast Track Arbitration, emergency arbitrator proceedings and online hearing rules. These features make ISTAC particularly relevant for construction, energy, corporate, finance, international trade, technology, transportation and supply-chain disputes.

However, effective use of ISTAC begins with a properly drafted arbitration agreement. Parties should clearly define the scope of disputes, seat, language, governing law, tribunal structure and availability of emergency relief. Related agreements should contain compatible dispute resolution provisions, and all signatories should possess the necessary authority.

Once a dispute arises, parties must act strategically. The Request for Arbitration, jurisdictional objections, arbitrator selection, procedural timetable, evidence and cost advances can materially influence the efficiency and outcome of the proceedings.

ISTAC should therefore not be selected merely as standard contractual boilerplate. The arbitration clause and procedural strategy should be designed in light of the commercial relationship, value of the transaction, potential disputes and location of enforceable assets.

Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. ISTAC rules, monetary thresholds and cost scales may be revised. The applicable version should be verified when drafting an arbitration clause or commencing proceedings. Specific legal advice should be obtained based on the contract, parties, dispute, seat of arbitration and intended enforcement jurisdiction.