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".

Commercial disputes in the international arena are basically settled through arbitration mechanism. In the course of arbitration, as a suitable and reliable authority for resolving commercial disputes, the issue of objections as a form of parties’ defence is introduced. Objections in terms of the impacts they might have on arbitration process, could be categorized into the objections with the effect of permanent and temporary impediment (to the proceedings). Although most applicable governing laws on objections are among the supplementary rules and considering them depends on expressing consent by the party or parties in dispute as the case may be, however some of the objections are mandatory provisions and are related to the public policy. Despite the fact that the Iranian Law on International Commercial Arbitration in its part is regarded as a commendable evolution in the international commercial arena, since it has not elucidated the issue of objections and merely has discussed its totality, leads it to encounter a fundamental gap. The study proceed with objections with temporary impediment effect and arbiters decisions by considering parties can what objections proposed and what are their effects in international commercial arbitration.

The complexity of the commercial affairs requires for the settlement of the relative commercial disputes to be handled by the specialized courts since accuracy and time is of essence in the commercial matters. Needless to say, the two aforementioned factors would not be complied with in the general courts due to the overload of their work. Issuing fair judgments in the commercial disputes would require the access to the credible commercial precedent and use of the commercial specialists. For this purpose, the concept of consultation has been predicted in the recent Bill of Commercial Procedure Law. In this article we would study the question of whether the said concept as stipulated in the Bill would result in the commercial courts to be more efficient. In order to answer to this question, the cost benefit analysis has been used. The study led to the conclusion that while the act of the lawmakers recognizing the consulting concept is admirable but the said concept entails deficiencies due to neglecting certain subtle points which would in return result in imposing some costs on the judicial system.

The hypothesis of de-infiltration of government, shows that if the host country has ratified a trade agreement with other countries, the government of those countries should be less likely to seriously interfere in commercial disputes and lawsuits. Therefore, the current research was considered with the aim of investigating the role of multilateral and regional agreements in de-infiltration of governments in commercial lawsuits from the perspective of diplomacy. Using the data of 86 disputes in Asian countries from 2021 to 2022, a logit model was explained and analyzed by estimating it. Netaich showed that the de-infiltration of governments in commercial lawsuits is more due to the issue of whether the political influence of governments in lawsuits is consistent with their strategic interests or not, instead of taking into account the extent of political influence of economic agents. Thus, they are typically encouraged to agree to arbitration in multilateral and regional agreements in exchange for less political influence in commercial disputes. While governments frequently intervene in developing world disputes, powerful governments rarely use threats, outright sanctions, and political influence in trade disputes. The lack of political influence of governments in the framework of multilateral and regional agreements has led to the institutionalization of the legal system to resolve commercial disputes, which results in less forced and aggressive diplomatic interventions. Finally, in the agreements, ambiguous standards due to multiple interpretations due to the malleability of language and the uncertain future should be considered as an important challenge.

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 methods of settling commercial disputes are important and subject to discussion. The purpose of this article is the methods of resolving commercial disputes in jurisprudence and the World Trade Organization in the light of the rule of law. This article is descriptive and analytical. The materials and data are also qualitative and data collection has been used.Ethical Considerations: In this article, the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness are observed.Resuts: Arbitration in jurisprudence, despite the existence of rules such as the Nafs Sabil rule, is reflected in Iran's international commercial arbitration law, and this indicates the position of the rule of law in arbitration from the point of view of jurisprudence. The dispute settlement system of the World Trade Organization has also played an effective role in realizing the rule of law by generalizing the dispute settlement provisions in international organizations, legislation and guaranteeing the implementation of approved laws. The findings of the article show that in jurisprudence, the most important non-judicial legal method is the settlement of commercial disputes. Arbitration, the formation of the dispute resolution board and the formation of the appeal body (appeal) are also the most important dispute resolution methods in the World Trade Organization.

The China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission-CIETAC is an important arbitration organization that many businessmen and investors from all over the world refer to annually to resolve international commercial disputes. This article tries to answer these questions: how and under what conditions does CIETAC have the jurisdiction to settle disputes, what is its scope of jurisdiction, and how does it increase the scope of its jurisdiction. The results show that by concluding a valid arbitration agreement within the personal and material scope determined by Chinese laws and the regulations of CIETAC, this organization acquires the jurisdiction to settle international commercial disputes. By recognising the possibility of a supplementary agreement between the parties, clarifying the ambiguity of the arbitration agreement and increasing its competencies by repeatedly amending its regulations, CIETAC has expanded its jurisdiction.

 One of the criteria for evaluating a fair trial is speed in court proceedings. In cases where a dispute concerns commercial matters, the speed of the court proceedings gains great significance.In some countries, commercial courts have been established to expedite court proceedings in cases dealing with commercial disputes, increasing the accuracy and quality of court proceedings.In the current age, when human progress in various fields, including commercial law is undergoing exponential growth, on the one hand disputes arising from interactions between different fields have become particularly complex and their settlement requires the application of numerous specialties, on the other hand, the court process is expensive and time-consuming. Since speed is an inherent feature of business, trial length in commercial proceedings can leads considerable financial loss to the trader.Therefore, in foreign investment, in choosing a country to invest in, businessmen, in addition to evaluating its security and economic stability, also pay close attention to the possibility of quick settlement of trade disputes. Therefore, overlooking this issue may greatly damage the country's economy.Thus, the present article seeks to analyze the concept of the principle of speed, examining the need to establish commercial courts and their role in commercial

Although resorting to arbitration is a common and desirable method for resolving international commercial disputes, insolvency disputes, remain within the jurisdiction of judicial, executive, and governmental institutions due to their connection to general economic and commercial public order. Therefore, resorting to a single institution for adjudication is ruled out and practically, these disputes resolution are dealt within the framework of multiple and independent institutions. This issue is more complicated regarding enterprise group insolvency. Facilitating disputes in this regard requires coordination and cooperation among role-playing institutions in this field including courts, liquidators, and other stakeholders. Due to the failure to establish uniform institutions, UNCITRAL has drafted a model law to coordinate insolvency proceedings in enterprise group. Consequently, regarding the necessity of understanding and achieving this model law results, this research, through a descriptive and analytical method, studies the dimensions and infrastructures for establishing communication and coordination among institutions and advancing coordinated and effective proceedings, while addresses adjudicating institutions independence under the UNCITRAL Model Law. On the other hand, it examines the anticipated arrangements for various stages of the proceedings

Features and requirements governing the commercial law demands setting specific principles and regulations for the procedure law in realizing an efficient condition. Among them, some of these principles and regulations concern the necessity of fast and simple proceeding of the commercial disputes such as summary proceeding, provisional execution of judgment and short limitation period in commercial claims, leading to a rise in error costs in making decisions. Some other principles and regulations emphasize on specialized proceeding and regarding the principle of Free Consideration of Proof, which despite reducing the error costs of decision leads to more costly and time consuming proceedings. In order to omit possible inefficiency as a result of applying such principles and regulations, the economic analysis of law suggests a trade-off between proceedings costs, error costs and proceedings delay. Therefore, in order to proceed the commercial lawsuits included in the appearance rule, priority is with summary proceeding and in other lawsuits included in principle of Free Consideration of Proof using certain methods is needed, such as Prejudgment Interest, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Prejudgment Interest or Settlement Escrow which helps to reduce the number of cases and consequently increases the pace of proceeding.