Search

Mediation is one of the well-known dispute resolution methods, and due to the increase in the use of the Internet by individuals, the transfer of most businesses to cyberspace and the conclusion of many transactions by electronic means, in many lawsuits, parties tend to use online mediation to resolve their dispute. The present study examines the challenges of online mediation and the approach of international regulations and Iranian law towards them in the following topics, so that individuals and business actors can figure out the suitability of online mediation to resolve their disputes by taking into account the above considerations: "Lack of face-to-face communication in online mediation", "challenge of confidentiality in online mediation", "general reluctance of using online mediation in some cases", "weak control of meditator over online mediation", and "the difficulty of enforcement of online mediation". Finally, this article concludes that in case of insistence of parties on face-to-face communication, due to the lack of trust in the mediator, lack of access to the required communication technologies or inability to use them, as well as the lack of confidence in the confidentiality preservation of the other party and the mediator, the parties will face serious challenges to use online mediation. According to existing international regulations. Because of the need to a specific law on mediation in Iranian law, the present article suggests the Iranian legislature to enact a comprehensive law on mediation, including the special requirements of online mediation, so that individuals can benefit from the advantages of this dispute resolution method.

The increasing development of e-commerce and greater access to technological facilities have made online dispute resolution as one of the most important global legal topics. One of the most important aspects of any dispute resolution method is how the outcome of the dispute should be enforced, and traditionally the final dispute resolution documents are enforced by the national courts through the coercion of the loosing party. The possibility of enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods is questionable because all or part of the relationships between the parties and the dispute resolution authority is established online, and in many cases, current international and national regulations do not provide efficient rules for enforcement of said documents. For this reason, e-commerce legal activists have envisioned new ways to enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods. In this article, the enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods has been studied in two main topics: "Compulsory enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods" and "Voluntary enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods". Finally, the present study has concluded that the compulsory enforcement of final documents resulting from online dispute resolution methods through the intervention of national courts, even if there is a legal possibility, is not commensurate with the characteristics and requirements of online dispute resolution methods and the use of voluntary methods if the necessary related rules are established, can significant increase the overall validity of online dispute resolution methods by notably increasing the possibility of enforcement of final documents resulting from said methods and encourage parties and business activists to use these dispute resolution methods.

One of the most important developments in dispute resolution law is the emergence of online dispute resolution methods. There are ambiguities and legal issues regarding said methods due to their specific characteristics and occurrence in cyberspace. One of the challenges of these methods is how to enforce the results because the ordinary or traditional methods of enforcing final dispute resolution documents are not helpful in this field. Due to the high importance of the enforcement of final documents in the validity and acceptability of each dispute resolution method, the legal doctrine and e-commerce activists: predicted and implemented solutions about automatic enforcement of results of online dispute resolution methods without the need for the recourse to courts or other authorities. The present study has examined the strategies of automatic enforcement of ODR final documents in the following topics: "Monetary Enforcement Mechanisms", "Domain Name Resolution Enforcement Strategies", and "Automatic Enforcement Based on Blockchain Technology". The present article concludes that supporting and promoting online dispute resolution methods and strategies for automatic enforcement of ODR final documents is the most critical and fundamental step in reducing the workload of the courts and other legal authorities. At the same time, such a goal is not achievable without the legislature's support and the approval of the corresponding laws. In this regard, the Iranian Legislature is advised to draft and enact integrated and comprehensive rules in the area.

Considering the great success of the New York Convention in encouraging business activists to use arbitration as a dispute resolution method, the United Nations drafted Singapore Convention on International Commercial Settlement Agreements, of which Iran is a signatory country. One of the most important issues in determining the level of executive support of the said conventions for the settlement agreements and arbitral awards is the examination of grounds for refusing to grant relief of the said treaties' documents, which in fact deprives some arbitral awards and settlement agreements from the executive support of these treaties. This article examines the grounds for refusing to grant relief to the implementation of the New York and Singapore Conventions in the following analytical subjects: "Specific Refusal Grounds of the New York Convention for Supporting the Arbitration Agreement", "Specific Refusal Grounds of the New York Convention Due to the Importance of the Seat in Arbitration", "Refusal Grounds Related to Terms and Conditions of Settlement Agreements in Singapore Convention " and "Refusal Grounds Related to Features and Behavior of Mediator in Singapore Convention". Finally, this article concludes that some refusal grounds of the New York Convention that are not covered by the Singapore Convention are originated from differences between arbitration and conciliation and the Singapore Convention's approach to delocalization and not mentioning rules about agreement to mediate. It also found that many of these grounds were unnecessary and would disorder the implementation of the Singapore Convention and the development of the conciliation in the future. Of course, the approach of the Convention is due to the conciliation's lack of reputation between several countries, and the drafters of the Singapore Convention considered it necessary to mention these provisions in the text of the Convention in order to achieve the consensus of the countries.