The Reasoning Behind the Non-Restoration of Arbitration Awards

Abstract

Retrial is a powerful legal instrument that allows for the correction of errors and ensures better justice in the judicial process. The primary objective of adjudication is to uphold rights and enforce justice. Litigation serves as the means of achieving justice, and a judge, like any other individual, is susceptible to mistakes and errors. If a judgment is issued as a result of a trial that contains errors, there is no doubt that it should be subject to judicial review. Therefore, to ensure that court rulings are free from error, retrial has been established as a legal mechanism. This process generally occurs at later stages of a judicial case and enables the aggrieved party to present new evidence and arguments to convince the court to reconsider the case. Undoubtedly, in legal terminology, a retrial refers to the judicial review of a claim filed by a plaintiff in accordance with legal regulations. It is considered an extraordinary method of legal review, and the specific grounds for retrial are outlined in Article 426 of the Civil Procedure Code, including forged documents used as the basis of a judgment and concealed documents. Since retrial of arbitration awards has not been anticipated under Iranian law, and arbitration awards in domestic law are not subject to retrial, this issue may be considered a challenge within Iran's judicial system. The present study aims to explore the possibility of retrial of arbitration awards. This research, conducted using a descriptive-analytical method, examines the retrial of awards issued by arbitrators. According to the International Commercial Arbitration Law, forgery or concealment of documents are grounds for requesting the annulment of an arbitral award. Given that no specific time limit exists for requesting the annulment of an arbitral award, such a request can, in a way, be interpreted as a retrial of the arbitral award. Due to the explicit provisions of the International Commercial Arbitration Law regarding the possibility of retrial of arbitration awards, and considering the overlap between parts (h) and (t) of Clause 1, Article 33 of this law with the sixth and seventh grounds mentioned in Article 426 of the Civil Procedure Code, it is cautiously possible to extend the principles of international commercial arbitration to domestic arbitration. This is because international commercial arbitration does not possess any distinct characteristics that would justify disregarding its established provisions in domestic arbitration in the absence of explicit domestic legal provisions.