The necessity of mention the elements of ‎arbitration action in the award and its role in the ‎validity of the award

There has long been debate over the definition of litigation among lawyers. One of the objections to this attempt was that it was useless or ineffective when each one was defined from a different perspective. We are now dealing with judgments in the courts in which the judge's decision is based on the definition of litigation and should not think that defining and analyzing concepts is completely useless. Sometimes the arbitrator or the court has to identify the meaning of the lawsuit in order to determine the possibility of hearing the lawsuit. Another result of defining a lawsuit and identifying its constituent elements is the effect it can have on the content of the judgment. In the sense that in order to be able to call the arbitrator's writing "award", I need to know the elements of "litigation". In the following, we will see that it is very important to identify the arbitrator's writing as an "award" and also that there is a fundamental connection between the litigation and the verdict in terms of their essential components.  In the judicial and arbitration literature, the only issue that has been raised is what parts of the arbitration award are composed. We know that the arbitrator generally consists of three parts: introduction, cause of action, and direct meaning of text, but there is a more important question: What are the essential components of an arbitrator?Because the arbitrator's award is based on a lawsuit, the issue must be viewed from the perspective of the essential components of the lawsuit. Accordingly, the concepts related to the elements of the lawsuit form the conceptual framework of the discussion.To find the answer, the above question is submitted to several other questions: What are the elements of a lawsuit in arbitration? Should these elements be reflected in the arbitration award?Generally, every arbitration has its elements therefore the arbitral award is also issued based on the arbitration elements. This fact raises the question of whether the elements of arbitration should be reflected in the award. If we believe that the citation of arbitration element is necessary, another question comes to mind, as to what are the elements of arbitration? The hypothesis of this research is "arbitration as a mirror of lawsuit", according to which the expression of the elements of litigation in the arbitration is considered necessary and a sanction is considered for not expressing the elements of litigation in the arbitration. The research method here is descriptive-analytical.Accordingly, the question of what are the elements of arbitration should be answered. We believe that arbitrators have the liability to cite the elements of arbitration in the award. Consequently, the lack of element citation would lead to annulment or amendment of the award by an appeal. These elements are including parties, causes and the subject of the arbitration. Failure to mention the plaintiffs, if the award can be amended, should not lead to its annulment or non-recognition. However, not mentioning the subject of the arbitration is a case of annulment due to public order because the supervision on the already issued awards will be impossible for the court. Failure to cite the cause of the arbitration, as it results in the reasoning of the award, is also contrary to public order that result to the annulment of it.