Approaches and Criteria Governing the Interpretation of Arbitration Agreement: A Comparative Study in Domestic and International Arbitration

The arbitration agreement is regarded as a method for the settlement of dispute in domestic and international context, according to which the parties leave the dispute to be resolved by private judge. For various reasons, this agreement, like other contracts, might be incomplete or ambiguous. Each authority dealing with the arbitration agreement, including the parties, counsels, arbitrators and courts, may represent different interpretations. The scope of arbitration agreement is one of the most common ambiguities in practice. This interpretation is even essential for qualification and identifying the real nature of the agreement. The main questions that motivate this research are which criteria could be used to construe the arbitration agreement and what is the competent authority as well as governing law for such an interpretation. Is it feasible to employ general rules governing the interpretation of contracts to the arbitration agreements? Unlike Iranian case law that addresses some of the criteria in this respect, our commentators are silent on the issue. Since these ambiguities arise in both domestic and international arbitrations, the present comparative study attempts to answer the questions under rules and doctrines of both jurisdictions.