English abstract
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.
