The Limits of the Intervention of the Will of the Parties, the Arbitrator and the Court in Compulsory Arbitration in Iranian and French Law with the Approach of Citizenship Rights

In order to resolve some disputes, the legislature has designated a kind of arbitration which is referred to as "compulsory arbitration." In this type of arbitration; the parties to the dispute, the arbitrator and the judiciary have legal authority. In our country, due to the limitations of compulsory arbitration, this method of resolving disputes is not very common and its importance needs to be expressed. The present research has tried to make a comparative study of the volition of arbitrators during compulsory arbitration in the two legal names of Iran and France. It was concluded that France, having a comprehensive arbitration law, while determining the compulsory arbitration for all specialized disputes and determining the executive regulations for it, as well as mentioning the arbitration tactics for resolving disputes, has limited the volition of the litigants and the arbitrator in a way that they are committed to the law in a better way. In our country, cases of compulsory arbitration are listed in only a few scattered legal sources and the arbitrator has the volition to determine the arbitration tactics and the volition of the litigants to choose the dispute resolution authority is evident. In order to protect the rights of citizens during disputes, it is necessary to formulate executive rules for compulsory arbitration and to increase the authority of the judiciary in some cases of compulsory arbitration by limiting the volition of the litigants and the arbitrator