Executive Support of Settlement Agreements in International Regulations and Iranian Law

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of Private Law Department, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

2 PhD in Private Law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

Mediation and conciliation, as one of the oldest dispute resolution methods, have never found a similar place compared with arbitration or litigation. The numerous advantages of this method for both the disputing parties and the judicial system have led to special emphasis on this dispute resolution method in the Judicial Evolution Document and also have resulted in the signing of the Singapore Convention by Iran as an international mechanism for the enforcement of the settlement agreements. The recent approaches show the desire of Iranian legislators to develop conciliation over other dispute-resolution methods. But considering the current lack of executive support for most settlement agreements, the aforementioned goal is hard. The most important reason for the reluctance of individuals and businesses to mediate is the lack of enforceability for the settlement agreements as a dispute-resolution document resulting from the mediation process. The use of mediation has no logical or legal justification, because due to the lack of enforceability of the settlement agreements, the parties must refer to the competent judicial authority for the enforcement of the settlement agreements, and it is more logical that instead of spending money and time in mediation, they firstly refer to the aforementioned judicial authority to resolve their dispute.
This comparative study based on an analytical-descriptive method tries to examine the current status of executive support of settlement agreements, as the most important factor in the development of mediation.
The question of the research is whether the executive support of the result of the mediation process is necessary, and if the answer is positive, what approach should be adopted by domestic and international regulations to achieve the goal? This article hypothesizes that the use of the legal system from the benefits of mediation depends on the executive support of the settlement agreements, the accession to the Singapore Convention from the international point of view, and the application of the provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law 2018 from the domestic point of view. Finally, the article concludes that executive support of the settlement agreements is the most important reason for the success of the mediation and the benefit of this old method of dispute resolution in the commercial activists and the judicial system of any country. In the international arena, with the approval of the Singapore Convention, an effective step has been taken to eliminate the aforementioned weakness and develop mediation. In Iranian law, there is a positive attitude towards mediation, and this issue is evident in the signing of the Singapore Convention, but unfortunately, the regulations of the Iranian legal system have given very limited executive support to the settlement agreements. Due to the lack of sufficient enforceability for domestic and international settlement agreements in Iranian Law (except in special cases), the Iranian Legislator should enact a special statute inspired by the UNCITRAL Model Law 2018 to support the domestic settlement agreements and complete the process acceding to the Singapore Convention as soon as possible to enforce international settlement Agreements.

Keywords

References

  1. منابع

    الف) فارسی

    1. دیدبان، المیرا؛ سید امیرحسام موسوی، (1401). «مفهوم و ماهیت داوری با اختیار صلح». پژوهش‌های حقوقی، 49، 201-223، DOI: 10.48300/JLR.2021.270788.1587 (31 تیرماه 1402).
    2. شمس، عبدالله (1398الف). اجرای احکام مدنی. ج1، چ سوم، تهران: دراک.
    3. شمس، عبدالله (1398ب). آیین دادرسی مدنی (دوره پیشرفته)، ج3، چ سی‌ودوم، تهران: دراک.
    4. شیروی، عبدالحسین (1393). داوری تجاری بین‌المللی. چ سوم، تهران: سمت.
    5. مافی، همایون (1394). شرحی بر قانون داوری تجاری بین‌المللی ایران. چ اول، تهران: دانشگاه علوم قضایی و خدمات قضایی.
    6. مافی، همایون؛ مهشید اسحاقی (1400). «تأملی بر رأی داوری خارجی از منظر کنوانسیون نیویورک در مورد شناسایی و اجرای آرای داوری خارجی (1958 نیویورک)». نشریۀ دیدگاه‌های حقوق قضایی، 96، 69-92، در: https://jlviews.ujsas.ac.ir/article_703693.html (31 تیرماه 1402).

    ب) خارجی

    7. Abramson, H. (2019a). New Singapore Convention on Cross-Border Mediated Settlements, In Mediation in International Commercial and Investment Disputes. First Edition, London: Oxford University Press.

    8. Abramson, H. (2019b). The New Singapore Mediation Convention: The Process and Key Choices. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution, 4, 1037-1062, DOI: 10.48300/JLR.2021.270788.1587 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    9. Alexander, N. (2019). Ten Trends In International Mediation. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 31, 405-447, DOI: 10.3316/agispt.20230131082573 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    10. Boulle, L. (2014). International Enforceability of Mediated Settlements: Developing the Conceptual Framework. Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, 1, 35-68, Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2443322 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    11. Chong, S., Steffek, F. (2019). Enforcement of International Settlement Agreements Resulting From Mediation Under The Singapore Convention Private International Law Issues In Perspective. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 31, 1-39, , DOI: 10.15779/Z38JQ0SV81 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    12. Chua, E. (2019). Enforcement of International Mediated Settlements without the Singapore Convention on Mediation. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 31, 572-597, Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3090 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    13. Deason, E. E. (2005). Procedural Rules for Complimentary Systems of Litigation and Mediation-Worldwide. Notre Dame Law Review, 80(553), 1-46, Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/1811/86485 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    14. Giaretta, B. (2018). The Singapore Convention: A Game Changer. Available at https://www.mishcon.com (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    15. Lo, C.F (2014). Desirability of a New International Legal Framework for Cross-Border Enforcement of Certain Mediated Settlement Agreements. Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, 7 (1), 120-138, Available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2443379 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    16. Morris-Sharma, N. (2019). Constructing the Convention on Mediation the Chairperson’s Perspective. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 31, 487-519, Available at: https://journalsonline.academypublishing.org.sg/Journals/Singapore-Academy-of-Law-Journal-Special-Issue (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    17. Reif, L. C. (1990). Conciliation As a Mechanism for the Resolution of International Economic and Business Disputes. Fordham International Law Journal, 14(3), 578-638, Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    18. Schnabel, T. (2019a). The Singapore Convention on Mediation: Framework For The Cross-Border Recognition And Enforcement of Mediated Settlements. Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, 19(1), 1-60, DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3239527 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    19. Schnabel, T. (2019b). Implementation of the Singapore Convention: Federalism, Self-Execution, And Private Law Treaties. American Review of International Arbitration, 30(2), 265- 289, Available at https://aria.law.columbia.edu/ (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    20. Schnabel, T. (2019c). Recognition by Any Other Name: Article 3 of the Singapore Convention on Mediation. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution, 20(4), 1181-1196, Available at: https://unov.tind.io/record/69840 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    21. Serbenco, E. (2012). Bargaining in the Shadow of Arbitration: When Mediation Settlements become Enforceable Arbitral Awards. Romanian Journal of International Law, 14, 68-105, DOI: 10.15779/Z38JQ0SV81 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    22. Sim, C. (2019). Conciliation of Investor–State Disputes, Arb-Con-Arb, And the Singapore Convention. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 31, 670-712, DOI: 10.3316/agispt.20230131082578 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    23. Stitt, Allan J. (2004). Mediation: A Practical Guide, First published, Great Britain: Cavendish Publishing Limited.

    24. Strong, S.I., (2014). Beyond International Commercial Arbitration? The Promise of International Commercial Mediation. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 45(1), 11-39, Available at:

       https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy/Vol.45/iss1/7 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    25.Sudborough, C. M. (2019). Mediating Sovereign Debt Disputes. In Mediation in International Commercial and Investment Disputes, First Edition, London: Oxford University Press.

    26. Sussman, E. (2018). The Singapore Convention Promoting the Enforcement and Recognition of International Mediated Settlement Agreements. Icc Dispute Resolution Bulletin, 3, 42-54, Doi: 10.15779/Z38JQ0SV81 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    27. Sussman, E. (2009). The Final Step: Issues in Enforcing the Mediation Settlement Agreement. In: Contemporary Issues in International Arbitration and Mediation: The Fordham Papers, 343-366, Doi: 10.1163/ej.9789004175556.i-382.120 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

    28. Vanišová, V. (2019). Current Issues in International Commercial Mediation: Short Note on the Nature of Agreement Resulting from Mediation in the light of the Singapore Convention. Charles University in Prague Faculty of Law, Prague Law Working Paper Series, a, 1-14, Doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3413560 (Accessed 22 July 2023).

Law Quarterly
Volume 53, Issue 1
September 2023
Pages 141-162

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics