عنوان مقاله [English]
By issuing an airway bill, air carriage of cargo with small quantities occurs; however, in fairly rare situations, due to the large volume of cargo, it dose in the form of charter contract. When airway bill is used, it is supposed that the one party is in a weak position; therefore, such carriage is monitored under the warsaw and montreal conventions. Unlike the charter, completely contractual. According to this disparity, arbitration is different. So in the first case, the substantive law, the applicable law (determination of the competent court), arbitration and other cases are determined by the convention. It is as if a limited form of autonomy is accepted in arbitration. In contrast, charter based on equal bargaining power, is free from the terms and restrictions. Therefore, the parties themselves determine the substantive law, the form of arbitration, the supporting court. Airlines can start arbitration in the charter contract as well. It is far clear that there are similarities between airway bill and charter. Among these similarities, the requirements of national laws such as article 139 regarding the arbitration of state property in iran is essential. The arbitrability of air cargo carriage of contracts for, whether charter or airway bill is the same. Based on the broad interpretation of the concept of cargo in the warsaw and montreal conventions, a wide territory, including dangerous goods and human corpses encompass. The present article examines these similarities and differences.