Iran Arbitration: How It Works?
Iran arbitration laws are governed by a dual system; domestic arbitration and international arbitration. When all parties, at the time of concluding the arbitration agreement, are considered to be Iranian, the arbitration is considered as domestic and contrastingly, when at least one of the parties is not an Iranian national, the arbitration will be international. These two systems are governed by two different models. Section 7 of the CPC is the law which regulates domestic arbitration. On the other hand, LICA, which is essentially based on UNCITRAL’s Model Law, governs international arbitration.
The distinction between international and domestic arbitration affects some important aspects of arbitration in Iran. By way of example, since LICA is inspired by UNCITRAL Model Law, many internationally accepted principles, such as the separability of the arbitration agreement, competence-competence and an arbitral tribunal’s authority to issue interim measures is recognised under international arbitration. On the other hand, in domestic arbitration, such examples are seriously disputed.
The governance of two different models in international and domestic arbitration also affects the enforcement procedure, setting aside, and annulment of the arbitral awards. When it comes to the matter of enforcement of awards, one should differentiate foreign awards from national awards. Foreign awards are enforceable under the New York Convention, since Iran is a member state. On the other hand, national awards (the awards which were issued in the arbitrations seated in Iran), are either enforceable under the CPC or LICA (depending on the domestic or international nature of said award).
Non-disclosure by arbitrator: a valid ground for challenge
Under Iranian arbitration law, the safest way for an arbitrator to avoid any future challenge is to, upon his appointment, disclose anything that might give rise to any sort of doubt as to his/her impartiality or independence. If such disclosure is not made in due time, anything that is revealed [...]
Stay or close of proceeding: the question of unfulfilled pre-arbitral steps
In the last few days, I was dealing with a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause, with ICC arbitration as the last step, and again, many questions regarding pre-arbitral steps started to whirl in my mind! In multi-tiered dispute resolution clause with arbitration agreements as the last step, while it is accepted [...]
Kluwer interviews with Dr. Oveis Rezvanian: Perspectives on Arbitration in Iran
On 16 August 2019, Kluwer Arbitration Blog, the leading source covering the news on international arbitration, conducted an interview with Dr. Oveis Rezvanian, director of Tehran Regional Arbitration Centre (TRAC), about the perspectives on Arbitration in Iran. After drawing a full image of TRAC’s organization and its scholarly activities, such [...]
Delayed Payment Penalty in Iran
In a recent arbitration under the Rules of Arbitration Centre of Iran Chamber (ACIC) with my chair as the sole arbitrator, a question arose as to the matter of delayed payment penalty for foreign currencies under Iran legal system. The dispute was arising out of a charter party contract with [...]
Time limitation in Iran arbitration
Time limit for rendering arbitration award under Iran law is a controversial matter, particularly when it comes to domestic ad-hoc arbitration. The common practice in Iran arbitration suggests that the default duration for rendering the award is three months. This understanding comes from Note of Article 484 of Civil Procedure [...]
Equal treatment: is there a solid definition?
Equal treatment and due process are perhaps two pillars of every arbitration proceeding. While the utility of some procedural features of arbitration (like document production) have been always discussed by practitioners and are still matters under question, equal treatment and due process have been always beyond any doubt that should [...]
