Civil and Criminal Liability of Judges in Violation of Privacy in Iranian and Canadian Law

Today, the arbitration system in commercial affairs, along with the judicial system, is known as the authority for handling claims in most legal systems. Countries have different approaches regarding responsibility. In some countries, judges are not responsible for compensating the damages caused to the parties in an absolute or limited manner. In Iranian law, judges under certain conditions according to Article 171 of the Constitution, if they cause harm to the litigants during the proceedings and the source of the harm is the judge's mistake or negligence, they will not be responsible for compensating the damages. It is obvious that if the cause of the loss is intentional fault combined with the intention or knowledge and awareness of the judge in the loss, the civil liability will be imposed on him without a doubt. All legal systems have confirmed the existence of the contract and the judicial duty of the judge. Failure to perform the duty of arbitration can result in disciplinary, criminal and civil liability, but the legal systems of the world do not agree on the principle of the civil liability of the arbitrator. In the Canadian legal system, a judge enjoys the principle of immunity from civil prosecution in the performance of arbitration duties, just like a government judge, unless he has bad faith or leaves the arbitration without permission. Arbitrations based in Canada are governed primarily by provincial and not federal law. Every Canadian province, except Quebec, has passed legislation to ratify the UNCITRAL Model Law. Additionally, each province has its own laws to regulate domestic trade. In this research, the laws supporting information privacy in Iran and Canada have been compared in a comparative manner, and solutions have been proposed to reduce Iran's gap with global standards in this arena.