Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi

Öz

Insurance arbitration has been gaining increasing importance as an alternative dispute resolution method in insurance-related disputes. Shaped by its own distinct legislative framework, the Insurance Arbitration Commission and arbitration practice have positively diverged from the arbitration regime governed by the Code of Civil Procedure towards a model more closely aligned with judicial proceedings, a divergence that gained momentum following the unified decision of the Court of Cassation in 2020 and acquired a new dimension with the Constitutional Court’s decision rendered in early 2025 in response to an individual application. In this study, certain criticisms regarding the duration of insurance arbitration proceedings are set forth. Our objective is not to criticize the existence of the system itself, but rather to contribute to the sustainability of this positive divergence. By virtue of the institutional structure of the insurance arbitration mechanism and its positive trajectory, the institutionalization of special arbitration processes -already subject to regulation yet currently underutilized- in areas such as “labor law disputes”, “consumer law disputes”, and “disputes between individual clients and banking/financial institutions” may also be triggered. It is our view that the concise criticisms set forth herein may contribute not only to prospective legislative reforms concerning insurance arbitration, but also to paving the way for the establishment of institutionalized mechanisms akin to insurance arbitration in the aforementioned fields.