نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار گروه حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Impartiality and independence of arbitrators are fundamental prerequisites for resolving disputes in a lawful and fair manner. In arbitration, due to the principle of party autonomy, disputing parties typically appoint two party-appointed arbitrators. A critical issue is determining the criteria for assessing these party-appointed arbitrators' impartiality or lack thereof. One perspective holds that party-appointed arbitrators are no different from neutral arbitrators in terms of impartiality and independence, and, given their judicial role in dispute resolution and the necessity of avoiding bias to uphold the legitimacy of arbitration, they are subject to the same conditions and requirements for arbitrator challenges. Conversely, another perspective, rooted in the philosophy of forming three-member arbitral tribunals, balancing arbitrators, and fulfilling the parties’ expectations, accepts a reasonable degree of alignment between party-appointed arbitrators and the appointing parties, thereby subjecting party-appointed and neutral arbitrators to different standards for assessing impartiality and independence. Employing a descriptive-analytical approach and examining legal regulations and juridical theories, this study analyzes the aforementioned dual perspectives and concludes that accepting a reasonable alignment of party-appointed arbitrators with the parties is consistent with the purpose of three-member tribunals and contributes to enhancing the quality of proceedings.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)