Non-Competition Clauses for Employees: Limitation of Non-competition Clauses In Terms of Place, Time, Subject and Restriction Authority of the Judge

November 2017 Özgür Kocabaşoğlu
% 0

Introduction

Provisions regarding non-competition agreements between employers and employees that limit competition liberty and economic future of the employees[1] are stipulated in Articles 444-447 of Turkish Code of Obligations numbered 6098 (“TCO”). Valid conclusions of non-competition agreements are subject to the conditions regulated in Article 444 of the TCO. If these conditions; i.e. employee’s capacity to act, a written agreement and legitimate interest of the employer that is worth protecting, are not present, or if there is no possibility of obtaining information for the employee regarding the circle of customers of the employer, production secrets or the works conducted in the workplace, or if there is no possibility that the employee may harm the employer, then the contract shall be subject to sanction of nullity and is, therefore, invalid[2]. According to Article 6 of the Turkish Civil Code, the burden of proof for the presence of the validity conditions stipulated by the TCO rests on the employer[3].

In addition, pursuant to Article 445/1 of the TCO, the obligation of non-competition of the employer as regulated by the non-competition agreement must be determined in a limited manner in terms of place, time and works that are within the scope of the prohibition; otherwise, Article 445/2 of the TCO recognizes the authority of the judge to limit extensive non-competition clauses in terms of scope or time:

The judge may limit the extensive non-competition clause in terms of scope and time by freely evaluating all the circumstances and the conditions, and by taking into consideration the opposing deed that may be undertaken by the employer, in a just manner.”

The Court of Cassation is of the opinion that the non-competition clause shall not be valid so long as it is not limited in terms of place and type of work, and limitations should be determined according to the characteristics of the work, and even to the features of the employee. Nevertheless, in this context, application of Article 445/2 of the TCO of the Court of Cassation demonstrates inconsistency. Below, decisions of the Court of Cassation in relation to this authority of the judge to limit non-competition clauses will be examined.

Practice of the Court of Cassation Regarding Agreements that were Terminated during the Term of Code numbered 818

Firstly, it is vital to indicate that according to the established case-law of the Court of Cassation, Article 349 of the Code of Obligations numbered 818 is applied to the non-competition clauses in the employment agreements that were terminated before the TCO’s entry into force. Pursuant to this provision, in a dispute before the Court of Cassation, the Court deemed invalid a non-competition clause stipulating that the employee cannot be involved in any kind of work or activity in the area of business of the company in three designated areas for a time period of two years after the termination of the contract, as the limitation of geographical area that incorporates a significantly large area could result in the financial destruction of the employee[4]. Although dissenting votes in the aforementioned decision indicate that the judge can uphold the agreement by exercising his judicial discretion by applying the provisions of Code of Obligations numbered 818, the Court of Cassation’s application in this respect appears to be consistent. Therefore, as there is no regulation that permits a judge’s intervention in the agreement according to Code of Obligations numbered 818, in contrast to Article 445/2 of the TCO, the sanction of nullity of the agreement shall be applied to the non-competition clauses that violate the law (that involves limitations that incorporate a significantly large scope, and that could result in financial destruction of the employee).

Practice of the Court of Cassation Regarding Agreements that were Terminated after the TCO’s Entry into Force

The Court of Cassation Decisions that Invalidates the Non- Competition Clause

The Court of Cassation’s case-law demonstrates inconsistency concerning the agreements involving non-competition clauses during the term of the TCO regarding the application of Article 445/2 of the TCO. In certain decisions of the Court, specifying the geographical limits of the non-competition clauses as being within the Republic of Turkey is deemed to be contradictory to Article 445/1 of the TCO, and considered so as to not specify any particular area. For this reason, the Court deemed the non-competition clause invalid as it violates the liberty of labor that is protected under the Constitution. In the dissenting vote of the aforementioned decision, it is argued that alleging that the agreement is invalid with respect to the same province, and even to the same neighborhood, by only giving the justification of inferring a considerably large area in the agreement, even if the agreement’s identifying the whole of the Republic of Turkey is not right[5]. However, in the aforementioned decision of the 11th Civil Chamber, Article 445/2 of the TCO is not mentioned, and the judgment is based on a constitutional justification regarding the liberty of labor.

Court of Cassation Decisions that Adopt the Opinion of a Judge’s Authority to Limit Non-Competition Clauses in a way that sustains the Clause

In many Court of Cassation decisions, it is emphasized that pursuant to Article 445/2 of the TCO, the judge may limit an extensive non-competition clause in terms of scope and time by freely evaluating all the circumstances and the conditions, and by taking the opposing action that may be undertaken by the employer into consideration, in a just manner[6]. In this respect, the Court of Cassation deems it inappropriate to render the non-competition clause invalid in agreements in which the limitation is made in a broad manner, without making an evaluation under Article 445/2 of the TCO. For example, the Court of Cassation reversed the decision of the first instance court that qualified an agreement stipulating a 5 year time limitation period for non-competition as a tying contract[7]. In this respect, the Court of Cassation reached the conclusion that under Article 445 of the TCO, the judge may limit this time period. According to the decision of the 11th Civil Chamber, in the event there is an extensive non-competition clause, taking the Constitution and other legislation provisions and the concrete case into account, the authority to make adaptation in terms of the scope and time of the prohibitions is granted to the judge, and this authority could be exercised both in a case of adaptation and in a case of compensation claims that would be commenced in case of a breach.

In terms of non-competition agreements that do not make any limitations, there is no consistency with regard to the Court of Cassation decisions. In a decision regarding the validity of a non-competition agreement that does not include any limitation, the 11th Civil Chamber analyzed the topic as follows:

“… Although provisions that stipulate non-competition inside the borders of the country are deemed invalid, limitation inside the borders of a province or a district could be seen valid as regards to the qualification of the case. In this specific case, when the provisions regulating the non-competition between the plaintiff and the defendant and the provisions referring to non-competition are evaluated, the fact that the time period for the non-competition in the noncompetition agreement is decided as one year, but there is no limitation with regard to the locus and business time is adopted as the reasons of invalidity, the claim is dismissed. However, it is stated in the agreement that the defendant employee cannot operate in the same context as the subject of the agreement in other companies and institutions operating in the same field. It is also stated that the non-competition shall be industry-specific and a penal clause shall be added in the event of infringement of the non-competition clause, irrespective of the existence of the company’s damage. The defendant worked in the claimant company inside the borders of … Province as sales manager and in the company where he lately started working with the title of sales manager, and his work field is determined as … Province … District. Although, there is no explicit regulation with respect to locus in the non-competition agreement, it is apparent that the defendant works in another company in the same sector, within the borders of the same province, under the same title. Moreover, it is understood that the defendant who is in the position of sales manager in the plaintiff company acquired information regarding the circle of customers of the company, and usage of this information is potentially harmful and to the detriment of the plaintiff company.”[8]

Therefore, the case-law of the Court of Cassation supports the opinion that the judge may sustain the agreement even if there is no limitation in the non-competition clause, provided that the employee works in the same area, operation field and type of work, in the specific case. Moreover, the Court of Cassation, in another dispute that it elaborated upon in this respect, is of the opinion that Article 445/2 constitutes a special provision with respect to the other provisions of law:

It may be inferred that the reasoning underlying this provision is to give the judge the authority to limit the non-competition clause at the legal and appropriate level by way of considering the equitable principles pursuant to Article 4 of the Civil Code, in the event that the non-competition agreement exceeds the limitations that are stipulated in the TCO. The sanction of nullity shall not be applied, as Article 445/2 of the TCO is deemed as a special norm with respect to Articles 27/1 of the TCO and 23/2 of the Civil Code. Considering these explanations, although the first instance court accepted that the sanction for the expression of “Whole World” in the agreement concluded between the parties was a nullity, Articles 445/1 and 2 of the TCO gives the judge the authority to take the measures to sustain the agreement against the excessive clauses and to interfere in the agreement. In this case, as the will of parties corresponds, there is no situation of nullity, but an invalidity that can be eliminated by the intervention of the judge.”[9]

The 11th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, in another decision along the same line, emphasizes that Article 445/1 of the TCO stipulates locus and time limitation for non-competition clauses, and that pursuant to the second paragraph of this provision, the judge can limit the non-competition clauses in respect of scope and time in the event that they contain excessive limitations[10]. The 11th Civil Chamber, considering the fact that the employee has commenced work with another competitor enterprise, which operates in the same city as the employer, holds that alleging the nullity of the non-competition clauses, because the latter addresses a very broad geographical area, would be inconsistent with Article 2 of the Civil Code. In other words, in this case, the Court of Cassation acknowledges that the judge may use his/her authority to limit the non-competition clause under Article 445/2 of the TCO and sustain the agreement, if alleging the nullity of the non-competition agreement constitutes an abuse of right.

Conclusion

In conclusion, in the event that the labor agreement that is subject to the dispute is terminated during the term of the TCO, much of the Court of Cassation’s decision regarding the limitation of the non-competition clause accepts that Article 445/2 shall be applicable, and that the judges may use their discretion in cases where there is an extensive limitation, or where there is no limitation in the agreement. In these decisions, whereas the Court of Cassation leans upon various reasoning, generally, the Court considers the conditions of each case, and acknowledges the discretion of the judge to limit the non-competition clause in the event that the employee starts working in the same district as the employer, in its operation field, and under the same title. Nevertheless, there is also a Court of Cassation decision in which the Court ignored the judge’s authority to adapt the non-competition clause that contains extensive limitations, and held that the extensive non-competition clause is rendered invalid as it breaches the liberty of labor, as is protected under the Constitution. On the other hand, the Court of Cassation has established case-law determining that in the event that the agreement is terminated during term of Code of Obligations numbered 818, the judge may not sustain the non-competition agreement that is not in conformity with the legal limitations, and that the related contractual provision shall be deemed invalid.

[1] Eren, Fikret: Borçlar Hukuku Özel Hükümler, 2nd Edition, Ankara 2015, s.567.

[2] Süzek, Sarper: “Yeni Türk Borçlar Kanunu Çerçevesinde İşçinin Rekabet Etmeme Borcu”, İÜHFM

C.LXXII, S.2 s. 457-468, 2014, s.462.

[3] Süzek, Sarper: “Yeni Türk Borçlar Kanunu Çerçevesinde İşçinin Rekabet Etmeme Borcu”, İÜHFM

C.LXXII, S.2 s. 457-468, 2014, s.462.

[4] Court of Cassation 11. HD. , T. 16.3.2017 , E. 2016/2751, K. 2017/1589 , http://www.kazanci.com.tr/

(Access Date: 23.11.2017).

[5] Court of Cassation 11. HD., T. 14.5.2015, E. 2015/1789, K. 2015/ 6904, http://www.kazanci.com.tr/

(Access Date: 23.11.2017).

For examples see: Court of Cassation 11. HD, T. 10.5.2017, E. 2015/15290, K. 2017/2808; Court of Cassation 11. HD., T.19.4.2017, E. 2015/ 14741, K. 2017/2261; Court of Cassation 11. HD., T. 17.11.2016, E. 2015/12799, K.2016/8956; Court of Cassation 11. HD, T. 16.6.2016, E. 2015/12450, K. 2016/6672; Court of Cassation 11. HD., T. 30.3.2016, E. 2015/8396, K. 2016/3470; Court of Cassation 11. HD., T. 1.3.2016; E. 2015/1658, K. 2016/2244; Court of Cassation 11. HD., T. 22.2.2016, E. 2015/7354, K. 2016/1838 http://www.kazanci.com.tr/ ( Access Date: 23.11.2017).

[7] Court of Cassation 11. HD. , T. 19.4.2017, E. 2015/ 14741, K. 2017/2261, http://www.kazanci.com.tr/

(Access Date: 23.11.2017).

[8] Court of Cassation, 11. HD, T. 30.3.2016, E. 2015/8396, K. 2016/3470, http://www.kazanci.com.tr/

(Access Date: 23.11.2017).

[9] Court of Cassation 11. HD, T. 16.6.2016, E. 2015/12450, K. 2016/6672, http://www.kazanci.com.tr/

(Access Date: 23.11.2017).

[10] Court of Cassation 11. HD. , T. 22.2.2016, E. 2015/7354, K. 2016/1838, https://www.lexpera.com.tr

(Access Date: 24.11.2017).

All rights of this article are reserved. This article may not be used, reproduced, copied, published, distributed, or otherwise disseminated without quotation or Erdem & Erdem Law Firm's written consent. Any content created without citing the resource or Erdem & Erdem Law Firm’s written consent is regularly tracked, and legal action will be taken in case of violation.

Other Contents

A Recent CAS Decision in the Scope of European Union Competition Law: FIFA vs. Agents
Newsletter Articles
A Recent CAS Decision in the Scope of European Union Competition Law: FIFA vs. Agents

At the meeting of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (“FIFA”) held on 16 December 2022, the FIFA Council approved the FIFA Football Agents Regulations (“FFAR”). In the FFAR, various amendments have been made, such as the introduction of a maximum service fee limit that football agents are...

Competition Law 30.09.2023
CJEU Judgment in Super Bock: New Insight on Resale Price Maintenance
Newsletter Articles
CJEU Judgment in Super Bock: New Insight on Resale Price Maintenance

Resale Price Maintenance (RPM) is still considered a hardcore restriction under the recently revised Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER), which means that it cannot benefit from a statutory exemption under Article 101(1) TFEU, unlike certain other types of vertical agreements. However, it has been debated...

Competition Law 31.07.2023
The Relationship Between Economic Entity and Family Ties in Light of Competition Board Decisions
Newsletter Articles
The Relationship Between Economic Entity and Family Ties in Light of Competition Board Decisions

In competition law, it is important to accurately determine the concept of undertaking, especially in terms of mergers and acquisitions. Therefore, the concept of economic entity aims to reveal the economic units covered by the undertakings. The relationship between the concept of economic entity and family ties comes...

Competition Law 31.07.2023
A New Breath of Fresh Air for Competition Investigations from the Constitutional Court
Newsletter Articles
A New Breath of Fresh Air for Competition Investigations from the Constitutional Court

In these days when the Competition Board (“Board”) frequently imposes administrative fines for preventing on-site inspections and both the Competition Authority (“Authority”) and undertakings take legal and technical measures regarding on-site inspections, a striking development has occurred. In its decision...

Competition Law 30.06.2023
Competition Law Practices in the Online Advertising Market
Newsletter Articles
Competition Law Practices in the Online Advertising Market

Online advertising has become an important source for businesses for promoting products and services and meeting consumers, as a result of the rapid development of information technologies and increase in the use of internet. Delivering targeted messages to consumers at the right time through the digital...

Competition Law 30.06.2023
Selective Distribution Systems
Newsletter Articles
Selective Distribution Systems

Selective distribution systems refer to a type of distribution system in which suppliers commit to selling the contracted goods or services directly or indirectly to distributors selected based on specified criteria, while the distributors commit not to sell the said goods or services to unauthorized...

Competition Law 31.05.2023
Final Sector Inquiry Report of the Competition Authority Regarding Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Retailing
Newsletter Articles
Final Sector Inquiry Report of the Competition Authority Regarding Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Retailing

Fast-moving consumer goods is undoubtedly one of the sectors that the Competition Authority has been working most intensively since the COVID 19 pandemic. Among the most important developments of this period was the Sector Inquiry initiated on Fast Moving Consumer Goods (“FMCG”) Retailing...

Competition Law 30.04.2023
Constitutional Court's Evaluation of the Competition Board's Authority to Conduct On-Site Investigations
Newsletter Articles
Constitutional Court's Evaluation of the Competition Board's Authority to Conduct On-Site Investigations

In the decision of the Constitutional Court ("Constitutional Court" or "Court") dated 09.11.2022, numbered 2020/67 E. 2022/139 K. (the "Decision"), the annulment of certain articles of the Law Amending the Law on the Protection of Competition No. 4054 ("Law No. 7246") was requested...

Competition Law 30.04.2023
Gun Jumping in Turkish Competition Law
Newsletter Articles
Gun Jumping in Turkish Competition Law

In Turkish competition law, certain types of mergers and acquisitions are subject to Turkish Competition Board’s (“Board”) approval in order to gain legal validity. Pursuant to Article 7 of the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”), the Board is competent to define mergers and acquisitions...

Competition Law 31.03.2023
The Problem of Returning the Data Obtained as a Result of Unlawful Notification in Light of the Competition Board Decision
Newsletter Articles
The Problem of Returning the Data Obtained as a Result of Unlawful Notification in Light of the Competition Board Decision

Recently, the Competition Board (the Board) had imposed administrative fines on banks and financial institutions for failing to respond to the request for information within the scope of a preliminary investigation.[i] The request for information that lays the groundwork for the administrative fine imposed by...

Competition Law 28.02.2023
The European Commission Accepts Amazon’s Commitments
Newsletter Articles
The European Commission Accepts Amazon’s Commitments

Amazon, a world-famous company, is an e-commerce company that operates the world’s largest online shopping platform. In the backstage, Amazon is a data-driven company whose retail decisions are mostly driven by automated systems, fueled by the relevant market data. That being said, Amazon has a dual...

Competition Law 31.01.2023
Deletion of WhatsApp Correspondence During On-Site Inspections
Newsletter Articles
Deletion of WhatsApp Correspondence During On-Site Inspections

The right to make on-site inspections is one of the Competition Board’s (“Board”) most important tools for revealing whether Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition (“Law No. 4054”) has been violated. The effective use of this authority is quite important in terms of obtaining fruitful results from...

Competition Law 31.10.2022
Amendment on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce: “The Fire of Mount Doom”
Newsletter Articles
Amendment on the Regulation of Electronic Commerce: “The Fire of Mount Doom”

“Harese” is an interesting Arabic word. There is a thorn that camels love very much in the desert. The camel eats the thorn with great greed. So much so that, its mouth bleeds as it eats, but it doesn't stop eating. The taste of the thorn is mixed with the salty taste of its own blood. This mixed taste drives the camel...

Competition Law 30.09.2022
Turkish Competition Board Fines Digiturk
Newsletter Articles
Turkish Competition Board Fines Digiturk

Turkey’s leading pay television service provider, Krea İçerik Hizmetleri ve Prodüksiyon A.Ş. (“Digiturk”), is frequently the subject of complaints made to the Competition Authority (“Authority”). In fact, the Competition Board (“Board”) issues a new decision about Digiturk almost every year. In these decisions...

Competition Law 30.09.2022
The French Competition Authority’s Decision on Meta’s Commitments
Newsletter Articles
The French Competition Authority’s Decision on Meta’s Commitments

The French Competition Authority (Autorité de la Concurrence), within the scope of the competition law proceeding initiated upon the complaint of Criteo SA (“Criteo”), accepted the commitments proposed by Meta Platforms Inc., Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd., and Facebook France...

Competition Law 31.07.2022
A Different Approach to Monetary Fines for Hindering On-Site Inspection: The Decision of the Ankara II. Administrative Court
Newsletter Articles
A Different Approach to Monetary Fines for Hindering On-Site Inspection: The Decision of the Ankara II. Administrative Court

While the scope of Competition Board’s (“Board”) power to conduct on-site inspections has increased with the introduction of Guidelines on Examination of Digital Data during On-site Inspections (“Guidelines”), nowadays the amount of monetary fines imposed on undertakings continue to...

Competition Law 31.07.2022
Hub and Spoke Cartel in Comparative Law
Newsletter Articles
Hub and Spoke Cartel in Comparative Law

The hub and spoke cartel, which is a relatively new type of violation in terms of Turkish competition law, is defined as the indirect exchange of information between two independent undertakings which are horizontal competitors on the supplier or retailer level, through another undertaking...

Competition Law April 2022
The First Settlement Case in Turkish Competition Law
Newsletter Articles
The First Settlement Case in Turkish Competition Law

The settlement mechanism has only recently been introduced to Turkish competition law practice. It entered into force with the amendment made to the Law on the Protection of Competition (“Law”) numbered 4054 on 16.06.2020, and has been in effect for less than two years. In this relatively...

Competition Law April 2022
The E-Marketplace Platforms Sector Inquiry Final Report and What It Brings
Newsletter Articles
The E-Marketplace Platforms Sector Inquiry Final Report and What It Brings

Due to their increasing share in the economy and rapid growth rate, e-marketplace platforms have come under the increasing scrutiny of the Turkish Competition Authority (“Authority”) as well as many competition authorities around the world...

Competition Law April 2022
Amendments Introduced to the Communique Concerning the Mergers and Acquisitions Requiring Competition Board’s Approval
Newsletter Articles
Amendments Introduced to the Communique Concerning the Mergers and Acquisitions Requiring Competition Board’s Approval

Pursuant to the Amendment Communiqué Concerning the Mergers and Acquisitions Requiring the Competition Board’s Approval (“Amending Communiqué”) published in the Official Gazette dated March 4th, 2022 and numbered 31768, certain amendments have been introduced...

Competition Law March 2022
A New Glance at Online Sales: The Competition Board’s BSH Decision
Newsletter Articles
A New Glance at Online Sales: The Competition Board’s BSH Decision

The Competition Board (“Board”) has recently published a reasoned decision in which it evaluated BSH Ev Aletleri Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.’s (“BSH”) request for negative clearance or exemption with regard to its practice of prohibiting authorized dealers from making sales through online marketplaces...

Competition Law March 2022
E-Marketplace Platforms Industry Review Preliminary Report Part 2: “Shahmaran’s Story”
Newsletter Articles
E-Marketplace Platforms Industry Review Preliminary Report Part 2: “Shahmaran’s Story”

Shahmaran, a Mesopotamian myth, is believed to take place in Tarsus. According to the myth, the shah of snakes is the immortal and omniscient "Shahmaran." Shahmaran is described as a beautiful woman living in her cave with her snakes...

Competition Law February 2022
Online Sales Within The Framework Of Competition Law
Newsletter Articles
The Effects of the Recent Decision by the Turkish Competition Board on Market Chains and Their Suppliers
Newsletter Articles
The Effects of the Recent Decision by the Turkish Competition Board on Market Chains and Their Suppliers

During the COVID-19 pandemic, competitive concerns about the pricing behavior of chain markets, manufacturers, and wholesalers engaged in the retail trade of food and cleaning supplies led to an investigation by...

Competition Law January 2022
On-Site Inspections in Light of the Recent Decisions of the Competition Authority
Newsletter Articles
On-Site Inspections in Light of the Recent Decisions of the Competition Authority

When the past decisions and the recent decisions of the Competition Board (“Board”) are examined, a significant increase can be observed in the number of decisions where the Board found hindrance or obstruction of on-site inspections. This situation shows that...

Competition Law December 2021
The European Commission Fines Banks for Participating in a Forex Cartel
Newsletter Articles
The European Commission Fines Banks for Participating in a Forex Cartel

The European Commission began investigating the collusive behavior of Credit Suisse, UBS, Barclays, RBS, and HSBC in the Foreign Exchange (forex) spot trading market in 2019. With the recent press release dated 02.12.2021, the Commission announced that the case is now closed...

Competition Law December 2021
Hub and Spoke Cartels
Newsletter Articles
Hub and Spoke Cartels
Competition Law November 2021
E-Marketplace Platforms Industry Review Preliminary Report Part 1: “Captain, an object is approaching”
Newsletter Articles
E-Marketplace Platforms Industry Review Preliminary Report Part 1: “Captain, an object is approaching”

Digitalization, in particular, necessitates the rewriting of competition law rules. Competition law is at the center all questions regarding e-commerce and digital platforms. The aforementioned platforms, which have become prominent due to innovations in...

Competition Law November 2021
Coca Cola’s Commitments in the Recent Competition Investigation
Newsletter Articles
Settlement Regulation Enters into Force
Newsletter Articles
Settlement Regulation Enters into Force
Competition Law July 2021
Competition Law Concerns Regarding Human Resources Practices
Newsletter Articles
The New Cartel Decision of the Competition Board
Newsletter Articles
The New Cartel Decision of the Competition Board
Competition Law September 2020
Amendments in the Law on the Protection of Competition
Newsletter Articles
Setting Legal Grounds for On-site Inspections
Newsletter Articles
Evaluation of COVID 19 Outbreak in Terms of Turkish Competition Law
Newsletter Articles
The File of Sahibinden.com; A Phoenix Story
Newsletter Articles
The File of Sahibinden.com; A Phoenix Story
Competition Law February 2020
Final and Interim Decisions of the Turkish Competition Board
Newsletter Articles
Second Stage in Facebook File
Newsletter Articles
Second Stage in Facebook File
Competition Law September 2019
European Commission’s Foreign Exchange Spot Trading Cartel Decisions
Newsletter Articles
Expected Second Half of Competition Authority’s 12 Banks Decision
Newsletter Articles
Turkish Competition Board’s Sahibinden.com Decision
Newsletter Articles
Recent Developments in Abuse of Dominance Concerning Online Platforms
Newsletter Articles
New Horizons in Competition Law; Diesel Emissions Scandal
Newsletter Articles
Recent Developments in the Right of Access to Files
Newsletter Articles
Cards are being redistributed in the Turkish Beer Market
Newsletter Articles
The Recent Motor Vehicles Insurance Decision of the Competition Board
Newsletter Articles
Selective Distribution Systems under the Light of Coty Decision
Newsletter Articles
Competition Authority’s Sector Inquiry Report on Television Broadcasting
Newsletter Articles
Excessive Pricing
Newsletter Articles
Excessive Pricing
Competition Law June 2017
Amazon Decision and E-Book Commitments
Newsletter Articles
Amazon Decision and E-Book Commitments
Competition Law June 2017
Umbrella Effect within the Framework of Private Competition Enforcement
Newsletter Articles
Tüpraş Decision and the Rebate Systems
Newsletter Articles
Tüpraş Decision and the Rebate Systems
Competition Law September 2016
Important Reason in Terms Of Share Transfer Restrictions
Newsletter Articles
Booking.com Decision
Newsletter Articles
Booking.com Decision
Competition Law January 2017
Price / Margin Squeeze
Newsletter Articles
Price / Margin Squeeze
Competition Law November 2016
Recent Problems in Electricity Distribution Sector: ELDER Decision
Newsletter Articles
Intellectual Property Rights As Capital in Kind
Newsletter Articles
Right To Request Information Of The Shareholders in Joint Stock Companies
Newsletter Articles
Affected Market
Newsletter Articles
Affected Market
Competition Law August 2015

For creative legal solutions, please contact us.