NEWSLETTER-2020-metin

208 NEWSLETTER 2020 Comparative Overview on the Applicable Procedural Rules of Civil Law Jurisdictions The taking of evidence and production of documents are con- sidered to be the core issues of arbitral procedure. Although in most civil law jurisdictions, inquisitorial traditions do not provide for party initiated production of documents, and the evidence-taking process is largely controlled by the courts, this approach differs in the case of international arbitrations 2 . Applicable Procedural Rules to International Arbitration In almost all civil law countries, in accordance with the principles of freedom of contract and party autonomy, the parties are free to choose the rules that are applicable to international arbitration. In the absence of such a choice, the applicable procedural rules to international arbitration differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In certain countries, the legislators make a distinction between interna- tional and domestic arbitration and provide different laws. We can see this dualist system in Turkey and Switzerland; however, in France and Germany, a single law governs both international and domestic arbitrations. In Turkey , the Turkish International Arbitration Act (“IAA”), which is essentially based on the United Nations Commission on In- ternational Trade Law (“UNCITRAL”) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration is the applicable law setting forth the prin- ciples and procedures concerning international commercial arbitra- tions. Should the dispute have no foreign element and the arbitration is seated in Turkey, then the articles on domestic arbitration set forth under the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) will find applica- tion. In Switzerland , Chapter 12 of the Swiss Federal Private Inter- national Law Act (“PILA”) - which is not based on the UNCITRAL Model Law, though there are no fundamental differences - applies to international arbitration. If the prerequisites provided by PILA are not 2 Born , Gary, B: International Arbitration: Law and Practice, 2nd ed., 2016, p. 191.