Feasibility of Third-Party Intervention in Dispute Resolution through Arbitration under Iranian Law: With a View to International Instruments and Practices

Abstract

Arbitration, as one of the most significant alternatives to judicial litigation, is fundamentally based on the principle of party autonomy and the mutual agreement of the disputing parties. This characteristic gives rise to essential questions and challenges concerning the intervention of third parties in arbitration proceedings. Unlike judicial litigation systems, which generally recognize third-party intervention, arbitration—due to its private and independent nature—is subject to limitations in this regard. The inclusion of third parties in arbitration is at the intersection of two fundamental principles: the relativity of the arbitration agreement and the requirement to observe fair trial standards. Given that arbitral jurisdiction stems from the consent of the original parties, the inclusion of any third party necessitates the verification of their consent, along with that of the existing parties, and the existence of a close legal relationship with the subject matter of the arbitration. This article analyzes the theoretical foundations of third-party intervention and examines the legal feasibility of such intervention through mechanisms such as the extension of the arbitration clause. Despite the existence of a specific provision regarding third-party intervention in Iran’s Law on International Commercial Arbitration, a legislative gap remains in this area. Therefore, the enactment of detailed regulations addressing third-party participation in arbitration, along with a clarification of its conditions and consequences, is an essential step toward enhancing the efficiency and comprehensiveness of arbitration within the Iranian legal system.