A Comparative Study of Executive Guaranty of Arbitration at International Law (International Court of Arbitration and the New York Convention) and Iranian Law
- Shila Taheri
- Hassan Soleimani
AbstractThe present study is an attempt to analyze the executive guaranty of arbitration at international law within internal Iranian law and the international law. The present research findings show that within internal law in case the arbitration verdict is not carried out voluntarily then its obligatory administration is under the support of law and has legal executive guaranty. But arbitration privilege at administration stage is not limited to the fact that any arbitration verdict is to be performed without any questioning but a significant aspect of this privilege is to prevent the administration of a verdict which is altered or creased and openly against the facts or the law. In international law the international commerce chamber arbitration system is the most important international trade arbitration system in contemporary period and has always been the influential forerunner in international arbitration and has had a significant role in the development and expansion of arbitration method of settling international trade disputes. Both the chamber arbitration rules and arbitration verdicts which are issued under the chamber arbitration framework are among the most important legal resources in terms of international arbitration and are considered as the constructive and formative factors of international arbitration procedure. It should be mentioned that commerce chamber arbitration organization lacks the executive tools to execute the arbitration verdicts. But in spite of that on the basis of arbitration rules article 35 the arbitration authority and the chamber arbitration court makes attempts to execute the verdict and the purpose is mostly the official measures rather than judicial or administrative. Principally, the execution of arbitration verdicts depend on state rules and regulations where from the identification and administration of verdict is requested.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Google-based Impact Factor (2017): 1.84
h-index (2017): 14
i10-index (2017): 39
h5-index (2017): 9
h5-median (2017): 11
- William TaiEditorial Assistant