مطالعات حقوق خصوصی (25885618)(3)pp. 447-466
Abstract
In judicial proceedings, the law specifies both the procedure for examining the evidence and the rules governing the substance of evidence, and sets out the duties of the litigants and the judge. In domestic arbitration, on the other hand, the brevity of the reference in laws to the evidence and the methods of its evaluation, along with the consensual nature of the arbitration and that it is based on conciliation, has left it uncertain whether the evidence of arbitrations are also subject to the court supervision, which has, in turn, led to controversies about the consequences of non-compliance with the rules of evidence in arbitration. Many jurists have opined that the courts are not allowed to engage in the substance of arbitration and the examination of the evidence as this would violate the independence of arbitration or the agreement of the parties. It will be argued here, however, that since the rules of evidence are connected to the substance of the case, they can be considered as rules that create rights. What we thus advocate is the principle that allows court supervision over arbitral awards both in matters of law and of fact as related to the evidence.
