چکیده:
According to Article 501 of the Code of Civil Procedure for Public and Revolutionary Courts in Civil matters (enacted in 2000), the main element of an arbitrator’s civil liability is the element of fault and there is no necessary correlation between a court’s invalidation of an arbitral award and the arbitrator’s civil liability. Conversely, the court’s confirmation of the arbitral award does not necessarily preclude the arbitrator’s civil liability, and in such cases, the arbitrator’s fault in rendering the award and conducting the arbitration process may still be established. The reason of this order is comparing with the judicial institution and the absence of necessary correlation between the reversal of a judge’s decision and their civil liability, the principle of the relative effect of judgments,the inconsistency of the necessary correlation between the annulment of the arbitral award by the court and (the arbitrator’s) liability with the foundations and principles of civil liability, such as the directness of the damage caused, acceptness of arbitrator immunity in other legal systems, the selection of the arbitrator by the parties in ad hoc arbitration and finally, recourse to some Islamic Jurisprudential Principles such as the Rules of Ihsan (Benevolence) and La Zarar (No Harm). In this article, while examining the methods of the arbitrator’s claim involvement, the annulment of the arbitral award in order to avoid the creation of the arbitrator’s civil liability, the arbitrator’s presence in the proceedings of the annulment action has been supported and consequently, under certain conditions, the possibility of a third-party objection by the arbitrator to the judgment annulling the arbitral award and its reversal has been accepted.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The reasons for this include: comparison with the institution of adjudication and the lack of correlation between the reversal of a judge's decision and their civil liability; annulment for reasons other than the arbitrator's negligence; the principle of the relativity of the effect of decisions; the inconsistency between the correlation of annulment of an arbitrator's award in court and their liability with the principles of civil liability, such as the directness of the damage incurred; the acceptance of arbitrator immunity in other legal systems; the selection of an arbitrator by the parties in ad hoc arbitration; and finally, recourse to certain jurisprudential rules such as the rules of Ihsan (benevolence) and La Darar (no harm).
" Since the arbitrator or arbitrators, by accepting the arbitration, are committed to announcing and notifying the result of their proceedings within the specified time, the necessity of compensating for damages arising from the delay in issuing the award shall be considered among the contractual obligations of the arbitrators; however, the enforcement of this type of liability will not take place in the form of liability arising from breach of contract, whether through compulsion to perform the exact terms of the contract, rescission, or claiming a specific penalty clause; rather, based on the provisions of Article 501 of the Civil Procedure Code of General and Revolutionary Courts enacted in 1379, arbitrators who, due to negligence, cause damage to the litigants or one of them, shall be obliged to compensate for the damages incurred (Katouzian, 1386: 274).
(
, 
, 
)
