Today, international arbitration is considered as one of the most efficient methods of resolving disputes in foreign trade, which is considered a more efficient option for managing foreign trade disputes in many ways compared to national courts. In relation to the investigation of the nature of international commercial arbitration, several theories have been proposed, one of the most important and certainly the most challenging of them is the theory of arbitration independence. In this research, we will examine many aspects of this theory and how it works in foreign trade. Different arbitral legal theories have different views on the autonomy of arbitration, with which they usually refer to its independence from national legal orders. Based on autonomous theory, the arbitrator is not forced to consider specific parochial requirements of each State’s public policy, but he only must consider the main rules which are arising out of the international community. arbitration is actually an institution whose main purpose is to serve the community of international businessmen, for this reason, it should not be used to promote the interests or fairness of the national governments related to arbitration, regardless of the country of the seat of arbitration or the country where the arbitration award is executed. Based on this point of view, any intervention of national courts that is against the assumed will of the contracting parties will actually reduce the efficiency of the arbitration institution in foreign trade, because practically, by choosing an arbitration institution, individuals want to free themselves from the constraints of national laws and not be under the rule of any specific national legal system. Proponents of autonomous theory, believe that the involvement of courts and national laws in the process of international commercial arbitration reduces the usefulness of the arbitration institution, because on the one hand, national laws do not have the ability to properly manage disputes in international trade and on the other hand, the intervention of the national court can make the arbitration process slow and complicated and therefore ineffective and finally, it will reduce the usefulness of the arbitration institution for the merchants. According to this view which has been approved by some national legal systems such as French law, basically international arbitration has a transnational nature and for this reason, the arbitration award issued in a case is not related to any national legal order and in fact has an international character. According to this view today, we are witnessing a new arbitration system in the international arbitration community which shows a new private order, above any national legal system that instead of relying on customs and national norms it is evolving based on the transnational principles and rules of international arbitration. In the view of supporters of independence theory, this is the new approach that will only help to ensure the efficiency of arbitration in foreign trade. Because this approach is completely based on the principle of independence and sovereignty of the contracting party's will in international commercial arbitration which emphasizes the spontaneous and non-governmental nature of arbitration in accordance with transnational conditions of international business in foreign trade, on the basis of which the origin of arbitration rules and regulations is independent of all national legal systems, and in fact, it is the arbitration agreement that is of primary importance in the arbitration process, not the law of the seat of arbitration. The material presented in this research shows that, not only theoretically but also practically, national courts in different countries in line with the common practice in foreign trade tend to acknowledge the independent nature of international commercial arbitration. For this reason, today, along with the national legal systems, we are witnessing a new legal system called the legal system of arbitration, whose principles and rules are based on the principles and procedure of international arbitration beyond referring to any specific legal system of a country. This new legal order with its self-regulation feature emphasizes the non-national nature of arbitration in foreign trade and as it will be analyzed in this research, it brings important results which in practice cause the arbitration institution to be more efficient for the international business community and it will also cause the maintenance and promotion of the advantages of arbitration as an effective dispute resolution method for businessmen as private actors in cross-border trade.

One of the factors that can be the link between our intentions and actions and their external consequences is human agency, which indicates the conscious design and intentional execution of actions by the individual in order to influence future events.Objective and Method: This research with a developmental approach of psychometric method and method 1, examines the psychometric indices of the Human Factor Characteristics Scale using the classical theory of test score measurement and the graduated question-answer theory. The purpose of this study, which included high school students in Tehran, was selected by cluster sampling of 500 people as a sample size and statistical analysis was performed on 481 data. To collect the data, the ion Human Agent Characteristics Scale (2011) was used and the research questions were evaluated using IRTPRO and SPSS software.Results:The assumption of local independence based on Pearson x2 index was established by applying Simjima's calibrated question-answer theory and the assumption of being one-dimensional based on the analysis of multidimensional question-answer theory. Diagnosis parameters with question-answer approach and classical approach Test score Both item 25 approach had the lowest and item 2 had the highest diagnosis parameter. The answer thresholds for all the questions were so far apart that no option was covered by the other option, and the options were independently selected by individuals at intervals of theta. The total scale was calculated with Cronbach's alpha of 0.945, intentionality of 0.894, foresight of 0.780, self-reactivity of 0.871 and rethinking of 0.762. Also, the role of each item in internal consistency was investigated by the loop method, which all questions had a favorable role in internal consistency of this scale. The value of the validity coefficient obtained from the question-answer theory was obtained by marginal method for intentionality 0.92, forethought 0.85, self-reaction 0.91, rethinking 0.83..

Introduction: arbitration has a contractual nature and is subject to the sovereignty of the will of the parties, but in some cases, the legislator imposed the referral of claims to arbitration on the will of the parties and caused the contractual nature of the arbitration clause to disappear or be limited. By doing this, he has placed the arbitration outside the will of the parties. This issue causes some moral conflicts in the discussion of compulsory arbitration. Therefore, this research has been done with the purpose of examining the position of compulsory arbitration in Iran's legal system and the ethical challenges in it with a descriptive-analytical approach. Material and Methods: The research was a review method, in order to achieve the goal of the research, in addition to electronic education books and virtual education in this field, articles related to the research keywords from 2004 to 2022 from the databases of Civilica, Magiran, Sid, Researchgate, Science direct, was reviewed Conclusion: Based on the findings of the research, it can be concluded that compulsory arbitration in Iran has ethical challenges in the field of implementation and interpretation, the most important of which is the issue of the right to action and judicial justice. In the context of ambiguities in mandatory arbitration, even if the method of arbitration becomes ambiguous, the arbitrator has the duty to find out the will of the legislator with the principles and rules of interpretation, which creates a moral conflict for the arbitrator.

“Extension of the Scope of arbitration Agreements to Third Parties in the General Sense” is one of the controversial topics in the legal world. Some, citing the non-judicial nature of arbitration and the basis of its agreement's effect on the parties' consent, believe that this effect also includes the parties' successors and related third parties. Others, emphasizing that arbitration falls within the scope of the litigation process, believe that judgment is a sovereign matter that is entrusted to the arbitration institution only in certain circumstances, at the discretion of the state. In the present study, using a descriptive-analytical method, in response to the question of whether an arbitration agreement is transferable to others, relevant legal doctrine and statutory provisions are examined, and the views of the two aforementioned groups are compared by identifying the “Concept of Succession and Third Party and Their Independence from Each Other”, “The Basis of Legitimacy and Jurisdiction of arbitration”, and by citing positive law and judicial precedent, “The Rule of Impossibility of Extending the arbitration Agreement to Third Parties in The General Sense in Iranian Law” is discovered and inferred; Thus, in addition to the fact that referral to arbitration is a completely exceptional matter, under no circumstances is a broad interpretation of the arbitration agreement possible with respect to the successors of the contracting parties and third parties.

Today arbitration centers offer significant services in context of arbitration. Offered services in centers are not identical, some of centers may perform different activity than others. One of major activities of arbitration centers is scrutiny of the arbitration proceeding. In centers such as the ICC Court of arbitration and ICSID also scrutiny of the ward take place. Scrutiny of ICC Court take place to draft ward and for issues of form, the tribunal is obliged to follow the Court suggestion. In ICSID scrutiny is an quasi-judicial oversight and center has the right of review and annulment of arbitration award. In this article we will examine the question of whether this type of monitoring is to intervene in the arbitration tribunal or national courts proceeding.

Just and essential proceedings by the considering authority requires to comply with trial principles, a matter that has been accepted by the Judicial Authorities. In the arbitration Authorities also due to Judicial function of arbitration work the observance of trial principles is necessary contrary to arbitration formalities. One of the principles binding by the arbitration Authority is the acceptance of lodging counterclaim by the respondent. Comparative study shows that unlike other countries that legislated this matter, in Iran not only the legislator but also jurists did not pay noteworthy attention to this topic. Regarding the counterclaim in arbitration it is to be said that this claim is admissible when it is in the scope of arbitration agreement or clause. In addition to the conditions of counterclaim the said claim is acceptable when there does not exist its barriers. Set-off also is dependent on the claim and with restitution of claim the set-off is discarded. Moreover, the mere restitution of original claim will not render the termination of counterclaim which is under consideration.

With a view to importance of the place of arbitration in settlement of disputes, encouragement of the population of a society for reference to an arbitrating foundation is necessary.One of the aims of dispute parties from reference to arbitration instead of reference to justice dept. is being released from prolongation of governmental proceedings (justice dept.), which is in practice attained, and realization of this aim is not possible without application of arbitration technique and its mechanisms. Governmental proceeding in courts has a start and an end point, in other words, it is started with submission of a petition and establishment of the first court session and ended with termination of proceeding and issuance of a verdict during a period of one week after announcement of proceedings termination.In internal and international arbitration it is also necessary that a start and an ending point (the arbitration period) is determined and arbitrator becomes obliged to announce the arbitral award in the determined respite. In the internal arbitrations, non-observance of this period and an announcement of arbitration award after the determined period of arbitration result in cancellation of this award. In the international arbitrations with a view to the principle of speed in commerce and whereas arbitration is mainly common in the commercial, transportation and insurance contracts, etc. if the parties determine the arbitration period, the arbitrator is obliged to announce his award during the determined period and if no period is determined, with consideration of the internal by-laws, the arbitrator is obliged to announce the arbitral award during a period of three months. Not announce arbitral award by the arbitrator in the determined period and his delay result in his disqualification from announcement of arbitral award.

Despite the fact that autonomy is known as one of the approaches related to the nature of arbitration, it is a type of rule-making mechanism in international commercial arbitration. This mechanism, based on the contractual nature of arbitration and aimed to achieve the goal of arbitration, which is the final peaceful resolution of the dispute, directs rule-making toward reducing court intervention, giving broad powers to the arbitrator or arbitral tribunal, and limiting the agreement that conflicts with the goal of arbitration. This article, using a descriptive-analytical method, first describes the quality of the autonomous mechanism and concludes that the autonomous mechanism is not specific to international commercial arbitration; rather, it is a rule-making approach that can also be applied in domestic arbitration. Then, it compares rule-making in the two legal systems of England and domestic arbitration in Iran. The use of the autonomous mechanism has led to the efficacy of the arbitration institution in English law. Rule-making based on the autonomous approach can mitigate or eliminate the inefficiency of domestic arbitration in Iran.