ارزیابی اولیه بیطرفانه ثمره دعوی: شیوهای نوین و کاربردی در حل و فصل غیر قضایی اختلافات | ||
| فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 28، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 110، 1404، صفحه 97-117 اصل مقاله (680.03 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.48308/jlr.2022.228347.2287 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| مریم داراب پور* 1؛ مهراب داراب پور* 2؛ نوید رهبر3؛ مجتبی اصغریان4 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشگاه آزاداسلامی واحد تهران شمال،تهران،ایران. | ||
| 2استاد، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) m_darabpour@sbu.ac.ir | ||
| 3استادیار، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران | ||
| 4استادیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| توسعۀ فناوری و ظهور مالکیتها و قراردادهای جدید که پیش از این شناختهشده نبودهاند، نوع اختلافات حادث را نیز متفاوت کرده است. در رفع اختلافات، الزاماً روشهای سنتی پاسخگو نیستند و حتی برخی روشهای مرسومِ جایگزینِ حلوفصل اختلافات نیز ممکن است طرفین را به نحو رضایتمندی به مقصود نرسانند. در این مرحله از بروز اختلاف، ارزیابی بیطرفانۀ قضایی، علمی و فنی اولیه از ثمرۀ دعوا بهعنوان شیوهای جایگزین در حلوفصل اختلافات، که از این پس «ارزیابی بیطرفانه» نامگذاری میشود، شیوهای کارآمد و گزینهای مناسب و مفید محسوب میشود. اگر لازم باشد ترتیبی برای روشهای جایگزین حلوفصل اختلافات منظور گردد، ارزیابی بیطرفانه بهطور مسلم قبل از مراجعه به دادگاه یا حداقل قبل از صدور رأی آن مرجع، و بهطور معمول، قبل از ورود به میانجیگری و داوری و کارشناسی است و زمانی که مطرح میشود، ارزیابی بیطرفانه برای حلوفصل بسیاری از اختلافات، بهویژه اختلافات مالکیت آفرینشهای فکری گزینۀ مناسبی به شمار میآید؛ چراکه بیشتر اختلافات از تصور اشتباه طرفین نسبت به حقوق خود ایجاد میشود و طرفین خود را به اندازهای محق میدانند که مذاکره و مشاوره و حتی میانجیگری راه به جایی نمیبرد و تا طرفین وارد رسیدگی حقوقی (رسیدگی قضایی یا داوری) نشوند، تصویری واقعی از حقمداری یا بیحقی یکی از آنها پیدا نمیشود. پس لازم است که روش «ارزیابی بیطرفانه» که اطمینان و یقین و درنتیجه انعطاف بیشتری برای طرفین به وجود میآورد، بهطور جدی مورد توجه و استفادۀ مفید قرار گیرد. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| ثمره دعوی؛ شیوه جایگزین؛ هزینه منفعت؛ سرمایه اجتماعی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Early Neutral Evaluation: A New and Practical Alternative Dispute Resolution | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| maryam darabpour1؛ Mehrab Darabpour2؛ navid rahbari3؛ mojtaba asgharian4 | ||
| 1PhD. Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University: North Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 2Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran Corresponding Author Email: m_darabpour@sbu.ac.ir | ||
| 3Assitant Professor, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| 4Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law & Political Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| With technological advancements and the emergence of new contracts and properties, the nature of legal disputes has evolved significantly. Traditional dispute resolution methods are often insufficient to meet contemporary demands. Parties increasingly seek solutions that are not only faster and more cost-effective but also capable of safeguarding social interests and assets. In this context, Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) has gained prominence as an innovative and alternative means of dispute resolution. By providing an impartial and evidence-based assessment of the likely outcome, ENE assists parties in gaining a realistic understanding of their legal positions prior to engaging in judicial or arbitration proceedings. Consequently, this approach enhances the probability of reconciliation. The aim of this research is to examine the underlying philosophy, process, and functions of ENE within dispute resolution frameworks, with particular emphasis on its application in the field of intellectual property. This study adopts an analytical and descriptive approach to explore the structure and core elements of ENE. Initially, the theoretical foundations and philosophy of the method are discussed. Subsequently, using both domestic and international legal sources, the implementation process of ENE and the role of the evaluator are elucidated. In addition, through analyzing sample cases and leading countries regulations, benefits and challenges of this method compared to other ADR mechanisms are examined. The study details the characteristics required of neutral evaluators, the selection procedures, and the necessary conditions for the effective deployment of ENE. The findings reveal that ENE's high flexible nature allows it to be applicable across a broad spectrum of disputes—from simple to complex cases. The method proves particularly effective in resolving disputes related to intellectual property rights, contracts, construction, and cases demanding technical and legal expertise. Compared to traditional litigation, ENE offers a more economical and time-efficient alternative, enabling parties to make informed, rational decisions based on a clear understanding of their case's strengths and weaknesses. Participation in ENE requires mutual consent from all parties, with the selection of a competent, neutral evaluator playing a critical role in its success. Beyond legal expertise, the evaluator must possess the ability to analyze issues impartially and decisively, maintain independence, and uphold complete neutrality. One notable advantage of ENE is its capacity to reduce the volume of court and arbitration caseloads, thereby facilitating better dispute management and decreasing social and economic costs. When parties harbor false confidence in their legal position and alternative dispute resolution methods are unlikely to reach compromise, ENE offers a realistic assessment of probable outcomes, paving the way for agreement and reconciliation. Compared to mediation, ENE emphasizes legal analysis and outcome prediction rather than consensus-building. Unlike mediators, who seek mutually agreeable solutions, neutrals solely evaluate rights and obligations based on evidence, documentation, and applicable law. This approach enhances the credibility and reliability of the assessment, often serving as a solid foundation for compromise and reconciliation. Additional important finding include the role of the careful drafting of ENE agreements, clear identification of issues and transparency throughout the process, and full cooperation of the parties, including provision of relevant documents and evidence is required condition for this process success. In multi-party disputes, evaluators must consider the interests and legal rights of all participants and deliver their assessments with unwavering neutrality. Overall, ENE represents a novel and efficient dispute resolution tool, especially in the realm of intellectual property. It offers a viable alternative to traditional litigation and some conventional ADR methods by increasing procedural speed, reducing costs, and enhancing party satisfaction. Its role in managing disputes and alleviating pressure on judicial systems underscores its strategic importance. Given the growing acceptance of ENE in various legal jurisdictions, fostering its development within the Iranian legal system could significantly promote justice and boost the efficiency of dispute resolution mechanisms | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| ADR, ENE, Cost, Benefit, Social capital | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
References Books
Articles
Rules and Regulations
Cases
Websites | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,598 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 433 |
||