Arbitration, as an alternative dispute resolution method, is widely favored for its speed and flexibility. However, Article 489(4) of the Iranian Code of Civil Procedure, by nullifying awards rendered out of time, has created serious challenges, including increased costs and reduced public confidence in this institution. The objective of this research is to critique the formalistic approach of the Iranian legislator in the absolute annulment of arbitral awards issued after the time limit and to propose remedial solutions through a comparative study of the English legal system .This research has been conducted using a descriptive-analytical and comparative methodology. The findings indicate that the stringent and absolute approach of the Iranian legislator, by prioritizing form over substance, undermines the fundamental goals of arbitration—namely, achieving justice and efficiency—and conflicts with the principles of a fair trial.It is concluded that reforming the current regulations and replacing them with more flexible solutions, such as granting courts the authority to extend time limits or to assess the reason for the delay, is essential for preserving the desirable functions of arbitration and enhancing its status within the Iranian legal system.

Article Type: Research Article