






   
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>LEGAL JOURNAL OF LAW, Year 2023 Issue 244 (NİSAN)</title>
    <link>https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=sayi_detay&amp;sayi_id=2414</link>
    <description>LEGAL JOURNAL OF LAW</description>
    <language>en</language>
    <pubDate>2026-07-16</pubDate>
    <generator/>
    <item>
      <title>RIGHT TO AVOIDANCE OF CONTRACT, ITS USAGE AND LIMITATIONS UNDER THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON CONTRACTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL SALE OF GOODS (CISG)</title>
      <link>https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=makale_tr_ozet&amp;makale_id=65851</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=makale_tr_ozet&amp;makale_id=65851</guid>
      <author>Sinan Olcay</author>
      <description>&lt;p style="font-weight: 400;"&gt;The Convention on Contracts for the Sale of Goods (CISG) is a projection of the work of a common legal system in the field of international trade. The law of non-performance of debts is regulated in CISG in a different way from our legal system, so that in CISG, it is important whether the breach of contract is fundamental or not. In case of a fundamental breach of the contract or, exceptionally, the operation of the “Nachfrist process", both the buyer and the seller are given the right to avoidance from the contract as a significant opportunity. The right to avoidance from the contract is seen as a last resort in the CISG. Therefore, the use of the right of avoidance from the contract is subject to various classifications in terms of the number of parties to which the right is granted, duration and exemption arising from the rule of good faith. In addition, there are some sui generis limitations that cannot be collected under these classifications. These limitations, examined in the paper, emerged within the framework of doctrine and judicial decisions.</description>
      <pubDate>2026-07-16</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Recent Development in British Arbitration Law and Its Impact on International Arbitration </title>
      <link>https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=makale_tr_ozet&amp;makale_id=64613</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=makale_tr_ozet&amp;makale_id=64613</guid>
      <author>Ticen Özraşit</author>
      <description>Both international and domestic arbitrations in England are governed by the Arbitration Act 1996. The Act provides the basis for the English courts to consistently uphold both arbitral practices and procedures within their jurisdiction and arbitral tribunals' awards. However, the Act does not regulate all aspects of English arbitration law. Practitioners, therefore, rely on case law as well as statute law to determine its status on many issues. Recent years have seen an increase in attempts to promote equality and diversity in international arbitration proceedings. A notable development in this regard in the UK came in November 2021, when the Law Commission announced its intention to review the Arbitration Act 1996, which governs both domestic and international arbitration. Between 2020, 2021, and 2022, there have been many developments in English arbitration law. Our study will attempt to analyze recent Supreme Court decisions as well as recent developments from arbitral institutions. It will assess the impact of Brexit on international arbitration, updates to the ICC and LCIA arbitration rules to increase efficiency and transparency challenges to arbitral awards, the power of state courts to intervene, and the application of injunctions.</description>
      <pubDate>2026-07-16</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>INTERNMENT OF PERSONS IN NON-INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICTS: NORMATIVE FRAMEWORK, PRACTICE, PROBLEMS AND SUGGESTIONS</title>
      <link>https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=makale_tr_ozet&amp;makale_id=63609</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=makale_tr_ozet&amp;makale_id=63609</guid>
      <author>Murat Esmer</author>
      <description>&lt;em&gt;In armed conflicts, the parties to conflict often resort to internment measures to ensure their safety. The fact that at least one of the parties to the conflict is a non-state armed group in non-international armed conflicts, where social tension and division have reached their peak, augments the debate on the legal basis of internment and increases the risks of internee people being exposed to forms of treatment contrary to international law. In this study, it is aimed to reveal the legal gaps and deficiencies in this issue by analyzing the normative framework and practice regarding the internment of persons in non-international armed conflicts, within the framework of the relevant regulations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. After determining the gaps and deficiencies in the normative framework, suggestions on possible arrangements and practices that can be materialized to overcome this situation and the structural obstacles to the implementation of the said suggestions will be analyzed analytically within the scope of the study.&lt;/em&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>2026-07-16</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Right to Reproductive and Sexual Health in Turkey from the Perspective of Women's Right to Health</title>
      <link>https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=makale_tr_ozet&amp;makale_id=65992</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://basvuru.legaldergi.com.tr/?mod=makale_tr_ozet&amp;makale_id=65992</guid>
      <author>Serpil KIRIMAmine Selcen DUYMAZ ,Ayşegül KARACA DEDEOĞLU </author>
      <description>In this study, it has been tried to determine discrimination based on gender and marital status by considering the political and legal regulations applied regarding the reproductive and sexual health of women in Turkey. The right to health is a basic human right that everyone has from birth, without any status basis. Since women experience processes such as pregnancy, childbirth, puerperium, menopause and the menstrual cycle, the risks of illness and death are very high. It has been determined that the application of assisted reproductive treatment methods only to married couples and the prohibition of single women from benefiting from this right by a regulation constitutes a violation of international human rights conventions and the Constitution.</description>
      <pubDate>2026-07-16</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>


