Вы искали: arbitration (Английский - Персидский)

arbitration
داوری

arbitration .
نتيجهء حکميت .

arbitration typically proceeds faster than court and typically at a lower cost.
داوری نوعاً از دادگاه سریعتر پیش می‌رود و معمولاً با هزینه کمتر.

conflict between nations should be resolved by arbitration, not by the sword and the gun.
نزاع بین کشورها باید از طریق حکمیت و داوری حل شود و نه با شمشیر و اسلحه.

he asked the kharijites to come for help, they refused because of the arbitration in the battle of siffin.
اسراف، پارتی بازی خویشاوندی و شکم پرستی از مواردی است که در نهج البلاغه به عثمان نسبت داده شده‌است.

===arbitration===binding arbitration is a more direct substitute for the formal process of a court.
داوری الزامی جایگزین مستقیم تری برای فرایند رسمی دادگاه است.

one of the first statutes passed by the commonwealth parliament was the conciliationand arbitration act 1904 (cth).
یکی از اساسنامه‌های مصوب پارلمان کشورهای مشترک‌المنافع قانون مصالحه و داوری (cth)۱۹۰۴ بود.

by your lord, they will not be true believers until they seek your arbitration in their disputes and find within themselves no doubt about what you decide and accept it wholeheartedly.
امّا، نه! به پروردگارت سوگند که آنان مؤمن بشمار نمی‌آیند تا تو را در اختلافات و درگیریهای خود به داوری نطلبند و سپس ملالی در دل خود از داوری تو نداشته و کاملاً تسلیم (قضاوت تو) باشند. [[«شَجَرَ»: درگرفت. کشمکش و اختلاف شد. «حَرَجاً»: دلتنگی، ناراحتی. «قَضَیْتَ»: داوری کردی.]]

1.1. the aspirational nature of international dispute settlement international dispute settlement has long been perceived as something more akin to a diplomatic and political endeavour, being aspirational in character. the aspirational nature of international dispute settlement is visible from the excessive focus in the history of international dispute settlement, both in politics and scholarship, on the exclusive question whether there is a need or not for a compulsory method to settle disputes settlement was necessary to avoid recourse to war,2 or by the less philanthropic idea that dispute settlement, or more broadly enforcement, was necessary in order for international law to be considered law.3 from the 1870s onwards, proposals for the establishment of some system to arbitrate international disputes were becoming common, in line with the generally favourable attitude towards international law and its role in international society.4 this resulted in a formalization of international arbitration which found its culmination in the creation of the permanent court of arbitration (pca) during the first hague peace conference of 1899. what is important is that international arbitration was seen, and still is seen today, as the method – par excellence – to avoid recourse to war and as themeans to achieve respect for international law or ensure implementation of international law. during the first hague peace conference of 1899 during which the pca was created, for the first time in history something akin to a permanent international arbitral tribunal was created. but therewas no compulsory submission of disputes to the pca, andthe pca,despite its name,was neither a courtnor apermanent tribunal, leading to quite some disillusionment amongst those who had strongly militated in favour of amandatory recourse to arbitration to avoid recourse to war. as tobias asser explained: ‘instead of a permanent court, the convention of 1899 gave but the phantom of a court, an impalpable spectre, or to be more precise yet, it gave us a recorder with a list’.5 when the second hague peace conference was convened in 1907, disappointment made way for some renewed enthusiasm for the idea of a permanenttribunalwithcompulsoryjurisdiction,but again thedichotomybetween the political preference for a mandatory system of dispute settlement was at its apex. the russian delegate, mr. de martens asked all delegates to join him in achieving ‘progress’ and supporting the ‘great ideal . . . of arbitration’.6 this statement, while encouraging, was in fact more wishful thinking, and the outcome of the second hague peace conference showed that the russian delegate had not managed to convince his fellow delegates to create a truly compulsory court of arbitration. the belgian delegate,mr. beernaert, for one, opposed the creation of a compulsory court of arbitration on the pragmatic consideration that such a project, if adopted, would simply not gather the necessary support of the states and thus remained a ‘dream’.7 these and other fine examples of advocacy are probably inherent in any international negotiation, but the important point here is that that ‘higher’ aspirational
1.1 ماهیت آرزوی حل و فصل اختلافات بین المللی حل اختلافات بین المللی مدتهاست که شبیه کار دیپلماتیک و سیاسی است و از نظر ماهیت تمایلاتی است. ماهیت آرزوی حل و فصل اختلافات بین المللی از تمرکز بیش از حد در تاریخ حل اختلافات بین المللی ، چه در زمینه سیاست و چه در بورس تحصیلی ، در مورد این سوال منحصر به فرد وجود دارد که آیا نیازی به روش اجباری برای حل اختلاف وجود دارد یا خیر.