There is always a need to find satisfactory and effective methods for resolving disputes between individuals in order to preserve the stability of dealings, the security of societies, and the security of individuals. Arbitration occupies an important place in settling disputes between dealers because of the justice it achieves outside the framework of the state?s judicial system, in addition to preserving for the dealers the confidentiality of their dealings. However, arbitration, whether institutional or individual, is subject to the judicial oversight prior to arbitration in the application of the preventive role of the judiciary or subsequent to it in application of the remedial role of the judiciary as an additional guarantee to oversight the integrity of the arbitrator's work in accordance with certain controls. Whereas individuals and institutions have increased their tendency towards arbitration as an alternative way to settle and resolve disputes arising between them, they have increased their tendency towards judiciary demanding to implement judicial oversight of the arbitrator's work. Some problems have arisen to which the research had to be directed to produce results that achieve the purpose of the emergence of arbitration. In light of the foregoing, I made this research and this was its title highlighting the remedial role of the judiciary represented in the judicial oversight subsequent to the arbitration in administrative disputes and the attitude of jurisprudence for it and the controls of this oversight and its limits, tools, and forms. I reviewed in it some of the problems that arise when the judiciary exercises this oversight and the rulings and principles reached by the Omani judiciary through the published ones by the Administrative Court, as well as the attitude of some comparative judicial systems as well as legislations in some Arab countries using the most prominent references issued in this field.