Majid Sarbaziyan; reza hashemi; mazkoor salehi
Abstract
The national courts’ intervention in the arbitration process is inevitable if the trial is expected to be significantly efficient. The national courts should solely intervene in arbitration process if they are legally permitted to do so. The importance of anti-suit injunction is observed in international ...
Read More
The national courts’ intervention in the arbitration process is inevitable if the trial is expected to be significantly efficient. The national courts should solely intervene in arbitration process if they are legally permitted to do so. The importance of anti-suit injunction is observed in international commercial arbitration, since it serves a dual function, that is, it is sometimes issued to support arbitration and sometimes to prevent arbitration. Therefore, it is necessary to address this question: “What are the positions of national legal systems and international rules/regulation regarding the anti-suit injunction?” National courts in the common law system tend to issue such injunctions based on arbitration agreements. By contrast, such injunctions are treated by the codified statutes as unjustified intervention in the judicial system. In international set of rules, such as UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, New York Convention and Brussel I Regulations on EU Law all have not granted permission to national courts to issue anti-suit injunctions. As far as Iranian law is concerned, there is no statutory provision on the permissibility of issuing the aforementioned injunction in the civil procedure and in international commercial arbitration
