جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "commercial disputes" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

Nowadays, the use of conciliation as one of the alternative dispute resolutions (ADR) is expanding in many parts of the world. The reason is behind the numerous advantages that this procedure has in its essence for solving commercial disputes with high efficiency. Now the questions that are raised are as follows: Are there any rules of conciliation in Iran or not? If the previous question is positive, are these rules effective? And what are the rules of conciliation in the laws and regulations of other legal systems? As a brief answer, it should be noted that in Iran, despite the existence of legal rules such as conciliation in the civil law and mediation in the civil procedure law, still conciliation as a dispute resolution method has not reached maturity and has not found an independent position among other procedure. This article is based on the premise that the rules of conciliation in the current legal system of Iran are significantly different from the rules of conciliation such as the UNCITRAL model law, the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce, the directives of the European Union, the Singapore Convention or even the national law of Singapore; In such a way that currently it cannot be used as an independent and efficient method in commercial contracts.Therefore, while analyzing the current laws in Iran, with a comparative perspective, the author tries to provide a comprehensive vision of effective regulations in conciliation. Although the principle is on confidential proceedings in the conciliation method, exceptions should also be made. According to the directive of the European Union, the principle of confidentiality is maintained and no person, including the mediator, has the right to disclose the resulting documents except: (a) in cases where this is necessary for the essential considerations of public order of the relevant member state, especially when for it is necessary to ensure the protection of the best interests of children or to prevent harm to the physical or mental integrity of a person; or (b) in cases where disclosure of the content of the agreement resulting from the mediation is necessary for the purpose of implementing or enforcing that agreement. The result of this paper revealed that, Another measure that needs to be fully anticipated is the issue of not being able to refer to the documents and evidence presented by the parties in other proceedings, and this issue originates from the main philosophy of compromise; As it was said, sometimes the parties consider compromise as a method of resolving their dispute, when condemning the other party is not their main goal, and in most cases they want to continue their business relationship with him. In principle, in order to obtain the satisfaction of the other party, they may waive some of their indisputable rights, or accept some of the violations of their obligations, or present reasons and documents to their detriment, so that they can show their goodwill to the other party.

On 26 June 2018, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law [UNCITRAL] approved the final drafts of the Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (the Singapore Convention). The goal of the Singapore Convention is to encourage international mediation in the same way that the New York Convention facilitates the recognition and enforcement of international arbitration awards. The mechanism provided in the Convention is based on national provisions and measures. The Convention provides a uniform, efficient framework for the recognition and enforcement of mediated settlement agreements that resolve international, commercial disputes. The Singapore Convention has great potential to impact the conduct of international dispute resolution in Asia, where mediation is viewed as a valuable tool to resolve commercial disputes as it is consistent with Asian values and culture. It is hoped that Asian jurisdictions will widely support the Singapore Convention, and thereby usher in a brighter future for Asian dispute resolution.

The emergency which occurs following the imposition of economic sanctions, necessitates the business transactions to be conducted through non-standard and irregular methods. Using front companies, and intermediaries, and non-transparent ways of doing banking payments have become the necessary part of Iran's foreign trade regime following the imposition of economic sanctions. Disputes raised before Iranian courts in relation to sale of Iranian crude oil through these unusual means proves the specific features of oil transactions which using these irregular methods of foreign trade may not corresponds to these specific features, This Article studies the different types of new commercial disputes which are created due to imposition of economic sanctions on sale of oil and oil products and proposes contractual solutions to mitigate the likelihood of these disputes.

Mediation or Conciliation has several advantages comparing with other commercial dispute resolution methods, including speed, cheapness, and countinuing commercial relations between the parties. Unfortunately, this dispute resolution method is not widely used in commercial disputes and individuals and business actors have not been able to profit the benefits of this dispute resolution method. The main reason for this situation is the lack of adequate executive support in Iranian law for the settlement agreement as the result of the mediation and conciliation process. Therefore, in this article, while explaining the benefits of mediation and the need to legislate supportive laws regarding this dispute resolution method, a commercial mediation model act has been proposed to the Iranian legislature, so that future enactment of this law leads to significant progress in Iranian commercial dispute resolution. The following three topics are analyzed in the article: "The benefits of commercial mediation and the need for a special legislative policy to support commercial settlement agreements", "The current legislative policy of the Iranian legal system regarding commercial mediation" and "Proposing a commercial mediation model act to the legislature".

Taking into account of rapid growth of international trade and the dramatic increase of the disputes arisen therefrom, it is indispensable to recognize the opportunities and challenges of "Electronic Alternative Dispute Resolutions (EADR)" for commercial disputes and to identify the conditions of interventions by the relevant governmental entities in the regulation and control of activities of online arbitration or mediation tribunals.This Article, at first, describes the history, opportunities and challenges of “EADR” and prevailing obstacles hindering its development and then, in the following sections, we will endeavor to clarify the roles and function of Judicial Power in its support, contributionand supervision for the development of “EADR”.As a conclusion, any intervention by the Judiciary Power in these activities must be planed and executed in the close cooperation with other relevant governmental and non-governmental entities so that no parallel action occurs in these regards and any inconsistent or insular official program is avoided. In addition, the prerequisites for the recognition and enforcement of online dispute resolutions should be identified in more details. Thus, we must try to provide coherent judicial precedent and realize and introduce the potentials and specific roles that the Judiciary Power can play in these reagrds..

Choosing appropriate method of dispute settlement is of utmost importance considering the fact that disputes are inevitable in contracts. This paper investigates one of the Alternative Dispute Resolution in international trade law known as Mini-Trial method. Two important questions are addressed: how is dispute settlement conducted via Mini-Trial method? How is it different from other alternative dispute resolution methods? This paper shows that this method is an optional, fast, informal and confidential compromise structured with the presence of senior executives and impartialparty. The parties shall submit their case to the senior management of each party authorized to settle disputes and then settlement negotiations begin. Mini-Trial method is not only a legal method, but also a management technique to settle disputes. The result of this process would be put in practice providing both parties agree to do so.