Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1 PhD student in private law, Varamin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Varamin, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Private Law, Varamin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Varamin, Iran
Abstract
In order to resolve some disputes, the legislator has determined arbitration, which is called "mandatory arbitration". In this type of arbitration; The litigants, the arbitrator and the judiciary have legal authority. In our country, due to the limitation of compulsory arbitration, this dispute resolution method is not widely discussed and its importance needs to be expressed. This research, using an analytical-descriptive method, aims to study the comparative will of the arbitrators in the course of compulsory arbitration in the two legal names of Iran and France. It was concluded that the country of France, having a comprehensive arbitration law, while determining mandatory arbitration for all specialized disputes and determining executive regulations for it, as well as mentioning arbitration tactics to resolve the dispute, limited the will of the parties to the dispute and the arbitrator in the principle of arbitration in order to comply with the law. Better stick to it. In our country, examples of compulsory arbitration are listed only in a few scattered legal sources, and the arbitrator has the will to determine the arbitration tactic, and the will of the parties to the dispute is evident in choosing the dispute resolution authority. With the aim of protecting citizens' rights during disputes, it is necessary to formulate executive rules for compulsory arbitration and to increase the authority of the judiciary in some compulsory arbitration issues by limiting the will of the parties to the dispute and the arbitrator.
Keywords
)