Systematic Evaluation in General Session by Prof. Dr. Ali Yeşilırmak
In the 1st General Session held on the first day of the event, Prof. Dr. Ali Yeşilırmak, who spoke in the session titled “Basic Philosophy and General Evaluation of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100”, evaluated the basic principles on which the CCP is based and the systematic problems encountered in practice. Prof. Dr. Oğuz Atalay also took part as a speaker in the panel chaired by Mr. Adem Albayrak, First Deputy President of the Court of Cassation. Mr. Yeşilırmak emphasized that increasing efficiency in civil proceedings is closely related not only to technical regulations, but also to the attitude and competence of practitioners.
3rd Working Group Discussed Efficiency, Alternative Methods and Types of Litigation
In the simultaneous group sessions held on the second day of the workshop, Prof. Dr. Ali Yeşilırmak served as the group chair of the 3rd working group titled “Increasing the Effectiveness of Arbitration and Alternative Resolution Methods and Problems in Types of Litigation and Their Implementation”. In the same group, Dr. Assist. Prof. Ömer Faruk Kafalı also participated in the meeting and presented his ideas and suggestions especially in the context of arbitration, arbitral expert witness and mediation practices.
Among the working topics of Group III were the development of arbitration practice, arbitral expertise and the problems encountered in expertise, the dissemination of alternative remedies (especially family mediation), the solution of problems arising from the types of cases, the institution of amendment and the practices at the appeal stage, and the limits of the concept of “completion of the judgment” within the framework of Article 305/A of the CCP.
Final Declaration and Closing
At the end of the day, each group shared its problem areas and solution proposals with all participants in the form of a presentation. Prof. Dr. Ali Yeşilırmak, in his capacity as the group chair, summarized the results of Group III and stated that alternative dispute resolution methods contribute not only to alleviate the burden of the courts, but also to increase the quality of the judiciary.
