Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
PhD. Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University: North Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran.
2
Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran Corresponding Author Email: m_darabpour@sbu.ac.ir
3
Assitant Professor, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
4
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law & Political Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
With technological advancements and the emergence of new contracts and properties, the nature of legal disputes has evolved significantly. Traditional dispute resolution methods are often insufficient to meet contemporary demands. Parties increasingly seek solutions that are not only faster and more cost-effective but also capable of safeguarding social interests and assets. In this context, Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) has gained prominence as an innovative and alternative means of dispute resolution. By providing an impartial and evidence-based assessment of the likely outcome, ENE assists parties in gaining a realistic understanding of their legal positions prior to engaging in judicial or arbitration proceedings. Consequently, this approach enhances the probability of reconciliation. The aim of this research is to examine the underlying philosophy, process, and functions of ENE within dispute resolution frameworks, with particular emphasis on its application in the field of intellectual property. This study adopts an analytical and descriptive approach to explore the structure and core elements of ENE. Initially, the theoretical foundations and philosophy of the method are discussed. Subsequently, using both domestic and international legal sources, the implementation process of ENE and the role of the evaluator are elucidated. In addition, through analyzing sample cases and leading countries regulations, benefits and challenges of this method compared to other ADR mechanisms are examined. The study details the characteristics required of neutral evaluators, the selection procedures, and the necessary conditions for the effective deployment of ENE. The findings reveal that ENE's high flexible nature allows it to be applicable across a broad spectrum of disputes—from simple to complex cases. The method proves particularly effective in resolving disputes related to intellectual property rights, contracts, construction, and cases demanding technical and legal expertise. Compared to traditional litigation, ENE offers a more economical and time-efficient alternative, enabling parties to make informed, rational decisions based on a clear understanding of their case's strengths and weaknesses. Participation in ENE requires mutual consent from all parties, with the selection of a competent, neutral evaluator playing a critical role in its success. Beyond legal expertise, the evaluator must possess the ability to analyze issues impartially and decisively, maintain independence, and uphold complete neutrality. One notable advantage of ENE is its capacity to reduce the volume of court and arbitration caseloads, thereby facilitating better dispute management and decreasing social and economic costs. When parties harbor false confidence in their legal position and alternative dispute resolution methods are unlikely to reach compromise, ENE offers a realistic assessment of probable outcomes, paving the way for agreement and reconciliation. Compared to mediation, ENE emphasizes legal analysis and outcome prediction rather than consensus-building. Unlike mediators, who seek mutually agreeable solutions, neutrals solely evaluate rights and obligations based on evidence, documentation, and applicable law. This approach enhances the credibility and reliability of the assessment, often serving as a solid foundation for compromise and reconciliation. Additional important finding include the role of the careful drafting of ENE agreements, clear identification of issues and transparency throughout the process, and full cooperation of the parties, including provision of relevant documents and evidence is required condition for this process success. In multi-party disputes, evaluators must consider the interests and legal rights of all participants and deliver their assessments with unwavering neutrality. Overall, ENE represents a novel and efficient dispute resolution tool, especially in the realm of intellectual property. It offers a viable alternative to traditional litigation and some conventional ADR methods by increasing procedural speed, reducing costs, and enhancing party satisfaction. Its role in managing disputes and alleviating pressure on judicial systems underscores its strategic importance. Given the growing acceptance of ENE in various legal jurisdictions, fostering its development within the Iranian legal system could significantly promote justice and boost the efficiency of dispute resolution mechanisms
Keywords
Main Subjects
)