جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "online mediation" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

Due to the development of e-commerce and performing a large part of the activities of people in cyberspace, today online dispute resolution methods have been able to find an acceptable position. The determination of seat is one of the ambiguities about online dispute resolution methods. In principle, many important issues in the hearings process are decided by reference to the legal provisions of the seat of dispute resolution, but due to the lack of relevant locations in the online dispute resolution methods, determination method of the seat of the dispute is questionable. The present study has examined the following issues as follows: "Delocalization approach in online dispute resolution methods", "The determination of seat in online mediation", "The determination of seat in online arbitration" and "The determination of seat in online negotiation". Finally, the present article concludes that according to the principle of delocalization, if the seat is chosen by the parties in the online dispute resolution, the same intention of parties is valid and final. In the case of non-selection of the seat by the parties, in online arbitration, the criteria of legal relevance of the seat, the applicable formal law and the competent court can be used to determine the seat, but in online mediation and online negotiation due to lack of legal effect, it is not necessary to determine the seat of online dispute resolution.

The increasing development of e-commerce and greater access to technological facilities have made online dispute resolution as one of the most important global legal topics. One of the most important aspects of any dispute resolution method is how the outcome of the dispute should be enforced, and traditionally the final dispute resolution documents are enforced by the national courts through the coercion of the loosing party. The possibility of enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods is questionable because all or part of the relationships between the parties and the dispute resolution authority is established online, and in many cases, current international and national regulations do not provide efficient rules for enforcement of said documents. For this reason, e-commerce legal activists have envisioned new ways to enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods. In this article, the enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods has been studied in two main topics: "Compulsory enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods" and "Voluntary enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods". Finally, the present study has concluded that the compulsory enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods through the intervention of national courts, even if there is a legal possibility, is not commensurate with the characteristics and requirements of online dispute resolution methods and the use of voluntary methods if the necessary related rules are established, can significant increase the overall validity of online dispute resolution methods by notably increasing the possibility of enforcement of final documents resulting from said methods and encourage parties and business activists to use these dispute resolution methods.

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..