A Comparative Study of the Taking of Evidence by the ‎Arbitrator in the Legal Systems of Iran and the United ‎States and the Rules of International Bar Association

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Private Law, University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services, Tehran, ‎Iran‎

2 University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services, Tehran, Iran‎

Abstract

The methods for collection and presentation of evidence are one of the most important concerns of the litigants and arbitrators, in order to prove the claims raised in international commercial arbitration. The position of different legal systems is not the same  regarding these methods in the assumption of the silence of the litigants. One of these methods is the possibility of demanding evidence by the arbitrators without the request of   disputing parties, which is known as the taking of evidence in a special sense.There are different opinions in regard to this matter. The most important reason for opposing to the taking of evidence  is its conflict with the principle of arbitrator's impartiality. On the other hand, the supporters of this method consider the discovery of the truth and just settlement of the dispute as a permit to the taking of evidences. Through the examination of the rules related to arbitration in different legal systems and organizations, it was found that it is possible for an arbitrator to take evidence in certain circumstances. This article, in parallel with the study of the arbitration rules of the legal systems in Iran and the United States of America, as well as the rules of Iran and the United States claims tribunal, analyzes the rules of the International  Bar  Association (IBA) in this regard and tries to introduce some criteria for the taking of evidence.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. English

    1. Arfazadeh, Homayoon (2001). Arbitrability under the New York Convention. the Lex Fori Revisited. Arbitration International, Vol. 17, Issue 1.
    2. Bockstiegel Karl, Heinz (2008). Public policy as a Limit to Arbitration and its Enforcement. IBA Journal of Dispute resolution, Special Issue.
    3. B, Born (2012). International Arbitration: Law and Practice; Kluwer International. the Netherlands.
    4. Gaillard Emmanuel & Savage John (1999). Fouchard, Gaillard , Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration. Kluwer Law International.
    5. Ge, y (2012). Insolvency Proceedings and Their Effect on International Commercial Arbitration. LLM Thesis, University of Ghent.
    6. Grantham, William (1996). The Arbitrability of International Intellectual Property Disputes. 14 Berkeley J. Int'l Law, 173.
    7. Halket T. (2009). Choice of Law in International Intellectual Property Arbitrations. A Three-Dimensional Chess Game? in Rovin A. (eds.), Contemporary Issues in International Arbitration and Mediation, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 24
    8. Kirry A. (1996). Arbitrability: Current Trends in Europe, Arbitration International, Vol. 12, (4), 14
    9. Kreindler, Richard (1997). Particularities of International Financial Arbitration in the Contex of Challenges to Arbitral Awards. Yearbook of International Financial and Economic Law.
    10. Kroll Stefan M. (2006). Arbitration and Insolvency Proceedings- Selected Problems in Pervasive Problems in International Arbitration. Kluwer Law International.
    11. Lehmann, Matthias (2004). A Plea for a Transnational Approach to Arbitrability in Arbitral Practice. 42 Colum. J. Transnat l, 234.
    12. Lu, May (2006). The New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Analysis of the Sevn Defence to oppose Enforcement in the Unites States and England; 23 Ariz . J. Int L & Comp, 34.
    13. Okekeifere Andrew (1999). Public Policy and Arbitrability under the UNCITRAL Model Law, International Arbitration Law Review.
    14. Redfern, Alan & Hunter, Martin (2004). Law and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration. Sweet and Maxwell, London.
    15. Ware,s.j. (2010). similarities between arbitration and bankruptcy litigation.
Comparative Law Review
Volume 14, Issue 1
Spring & Summer 2023
July 2023
Pages 539-562

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics