General Observations on the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal and a Review of the Tribunal’s Jurisprudence on Arbitration Procedure | ||
| Iranian Journal of International and Comparative Law | ||
| مقاله 2، دوره 2، شماره 2، اسفند 2024، صفحه 6-20 اصل مقاله (1.64 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22091/ijicl.2025.12449.1140 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| Jamal Seifi* | ||
| Arbitrator at the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal; Formerly Professor of Global Law Chair and Distinguished Visiting Professor at Tilburg University (Netherlands), Visiting Professor at Hull University (England), and Associate Professor at Shahid Beheshti University (Iran). | ||
| چکیده | ||
This article aims to address theoretical and practical issues arising from the author’s "lived experience" in dealing with the developments and intricacies of international arbitration, with a particular focus on experiences related to the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal. These discussions are presented in two parts. The first part consists of general observations that emphasize, on the one hand, the unique importance of the Tribunal in contributing to the maintenance of international peace and security through the peaceful resolution of disputes between two predominantly adversarial states. The Tribunal is referred to as a symbolic institution embodying the "ideal of arbitration for peace." On the other hand, this section highlights the hybrid and multifaceted nature of the Tribunal and its manifestations, noting that the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal is a multifunctional institution. It simultaneously serves as an international commercial arbitration tribunal, an international investment arbitration tribunal, a tribunal with jurisdiction over contractual disputes between two states, and a public international law tribunal. This multifaceted nature allows its awards to be examined from various perspectives. The second part primarily examines the Tribunal’s jurisprudence from the perspective of the interaction between distinct legal cultures involved in international arbitration and the mutual influence of their legal backgrounds on the arbitration process. This selection is made with consideration of the judicial issues prevalent in Iran and seeks to highlight the Tribunal’s unparalleled role in deepening the legal knowledge and practical skills of Iranian lawyers in dealing with international claims. In this regard, issues such as the non-requirement of power of attorney for legal representatives, the admissibility of written witness testimony (affidavit) by the parties, the submission of written witness testimony and oral testimony by individuals with a personal interest in the case or a master-servant relationship with the parties, the ability to cross-examine witnesses during hearings regarding the content and veracity of their testimony, and the standard applied by the Tribunal for meeting the burden of proof and the burden of production are all examined in light of the Tribunal’s various rulings. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Iran-United States Claims Tribunal؛ Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure؛ Testimony by Interested Parties؛ Standard of Proof؛ Burden of Proof | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Bockstiegel, Karl-Heinz, ‘The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: A Unique Example of Arbitrating for Peace’ in Ulf Franke, Annette Magnusson, et al. (eds), Arbitrating for Peace: How Arbitration Made a Difference (Kluwer Law International 2016).
Caron, David D, ‘The Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal and Investment Arbitration: Understanding the Claims Settlement Declaration as a Retrospective BIT’ in Christopher Drahozal and Christopher Gibson (eds), The Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal at 25: The Cases Everyone Needs to Know for Investor-State & International Arbitration (OUP 2007).
Garnett, Richard, ‘Demystifying the Burden of Proof in International Arbitration’ in Franco Ferrari and Friedrich Rosenfeld (eds), Handbook of Evidence in International Commercial Arbitration: Key Issues and Concepts (Kluwer Law International 2022) ch 4, 67–86.
Owen, Roberts B, ‘The Final Negotiation and Release in Algiers’ in Warren Christopher and Paul H Kreisberg (eds), American Hostages in Iran: The Conduct of a Crisis (Yale University Press 1985).
Pinsolle, Philippe, ‘Cross-Examination of Fact Witnesses: The Civil Law Perspective’ in Stephen Jagusch KC et al. (eds), The Guide to Advocacy (6th edn, Global Arbitration Review 2024) 105–118.
Sandifer, Durward V, Evidence before International Tribunals (rev edn, University Press of Virginia 1975).
Seifi, Jamal, ‘Globalization of International Arbitration: Trends and Implications’ in Christoph Benike and Stephan Huber (eds), National, International, Transnational: Harmonischer Drieklang im Recht(Verlag Ernest und Werner Gieseking Bielefeld GmbH 2020) 1571–1578.
Seifi, Jamal, ‘Legitimacy of Investor-State Arbitration: Addressing Development Bias Among International Arbitrators’ in Freya Baetens (ed), Identity and Diversity on the International Bench: Who is the Judge? (OUP 2020) ch 9, 165–178.
Simma, Bruno and Jan Ortgies, ‘The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal’ in Chiara Giorgetti et al. (eds), Research Handbook on International Claims Commissions (Edward Elgar Publishing 2023) ch 4, 75–89.
Sheikh Nia, Amir Hossein, Evidence in Litigation (1st edn, Sahami Publishing Company 1994) [In Persian].
Kent, Rachael D, ‘An Introduction to Cross-Examining Witnesses in International Arbitration’ (2006) 3(2) Transnational Dispute Management 1–9.
Orloff, Neil and Jerry Stedinger, ‘A Framework for Evaluating the Preponderance-of-the-Evidence Standard’ (1983) 131 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1159–1174.
Seifi, Seyed Jamal, ‘Arbitration and the Peaceful Settlement of Disputes’ (2013) 12(24) Legal Research Journal 6–19 [In Persian].
Seifi, Seyed Jamal, ‘Cultural Diversity of Arbitrators and Judges in International Arbitration and Judicial Proceedings’ (2023) 10(1) Comparative Studies in Islamic and Western Law 191–214 [In Persian].
Alain Craig v Ministry of Energy of Iran and others, Award No 71-346-3, 2 September 1983, 3 Iran-US CTR 280.
Apotex Holding Inc and Apotex Inc v United States of America, ICSID Case No ARB(AF)/12/1, Award, 25 August 2014.
Abrahim Rahman Golshani v The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Award No 546-812-3, 2 March 1993, 28 Iran-US CTR 78.
Reza Said Malek v Iran, Award No 534-193-3, 11 August 1992, 28 Iran-US CTR 246.
The Rompetrol Group NV v Romania, ICSID Case No ARB/06/3, Award, 6 May 2013.
Starrett Housing Corporation v The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and others, Case No 24, Order, 8 December 1982, 1 Iran-US CTR 386.
W Jack Bukamier v The Islamic Republic of Iran and others, Award No 528-941-3, 6 March 1992, 28 Iran-US CTR 307. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 159 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 77 |
||