Azam Amini; Alireza Ebrahimgol
Abstract
The Islamic Republic of Iran's law for jurisdiction of Iranian judiciary for proceeding with the civil suits made against foreign states was adopted in response to the judgments made by the US courts against the state government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its related organizations and breach ...
Read More
The Islamic Republic of Iran's law for jurisdiction of Iranian judiciary for proceeding with the civil suits made against foreign states was adopted in response to the judgments made by the US courts against the state government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its related organizations and breach of their immunity. However, irrespective of the validity of those decisions, now there are many various decisions, valid and enforceable under each state domestic law, issued by the court of each state against the other state. Under the US laws and regulations, resolving disputes arising from those decisions is the legal precondition for normalization of the relations between the both states. The 1955 Iran-US Amity Treaty will provide the national and international legal basis for such a settlement through resorting to the international court of justice and other means of friendly dispute settlement including arbitration. Historically, there are different ways for this resolution such as concluding lump sum agreements, establishment of foreign claim settlement commission, and international mass claim procedure (IMCP). All these methods have their specific virtues but it seems that the IMCP method is a more suitable way for settling disputes arising from decisions issued under those immunity Acts.
