تامین مالی ثالث

With the expansion of trade and commerce, today we are witnessing the emergence of new legal institutions, among which we can mention the financing of lawsuits by third parties. In many countries today, the financing of litigation costs, including litigation and arbitration by third parties, has become an important issue, but at the same time, its implementation faces many practical and legal challenges. Given the current world trade, trade practices and the need for countries such as Iran to align with world trade, it seems that the third-party financing institution should enter the field of legislation; therefore, it is necessary to study the legal aspects of this institution. Therefore, in this descriptive-analytical article, we will address the main question of what kind of non-legal and legal restrictions exist in order to institutionalize the financing of lawsuits by third parties and legal solutions to overcome these barriers and challenges. What can it be? The result of the present study is that in the justice system, compared to the commercial arbitration system, due to various legal and non-legal restrictions such as money laundering, conflict of interest and the possibility of usury, there is no possibility of current acceptance.

There is a growing stream of critics who see investment arbitration in favor of foreign investors and as a negative force as opposed to sustainable development. The phenomenon of third-party funding and its use in investment arbitration has increased such concerns. Third-party funding is basically the payment of all or a part of the arbitration costs of one of the parties of dispute by a third party funder which in return, the funder receives a percentage of the output of the award if successful. The purpose of this article is to explain and analyze the theoretical differences between pros and cons of third-party funding regarding the access to justice, screening mechanism for the claims, and the financial consequences on the host state. In this article, the advocates see third-party funding as a means of access to justice for aggrieved investors in investment claims, while the adversaries refering on the profitability of third-party funding, see this method in arbitration a form of wealth transfer from public sector to private corporations and also refer to the asymmetric structure of the investment arbitration regime as well as the risks arising from the transfer of management and control of arbitration process to the third party funders.