The Ratio between the Guardian Council's Interpretive Decisions and the Judicial Precedent about the Public and State-Owned Properties

Arbitration is an important means of dispute settlement in internal and external lawsuits. The government and its entities, particularly in international contracts enjoy of this means and predict such condition in settlement of possible lawsuits. The distinctive restriction in this regard is the principle 139 of the Constitution. This article with an analytic and descriptive attitude seeks to study the judicial precedent about the public and state-owned properties so as to determine the courts’ views based on the provision of this principle and manifestations of public and state-owned properties and to indicate the ratio of these conceptions with the Guardian Council’s interpretive decisions.
The study of the judicial precedent shows that there are different viewpoints in this regard. The essential point is that most of the courts issue the verdicts compatible with the Guardian Council’s decisions and they believe the restrictions laid down in the aforesaid principle focus on public and state-owned properties and the juristic personality of the administrator or the property owner whether governmental or non-governmental public institution is irrelevant.