Background and Aims: Arbitration establishes a boundary between freedom of contract and the role of the court in protecting the public interest. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to examine the coexistence of arbitration and competition rights in American and European law.
Materials and Methods: This article is descriptive and analytical. Materials and data are also qualitative and data collection was used in collecting materials and data.
Ethical Considerations: In this article, the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness are observed.
Findings: Governments have traditionally and since the creation of competition rights, had a negative approach towards the arbitration of claims in this field of regulations. In competitive lawsuits, public and private interests are mixed together, and there may be an impression that the arbitrator, because he gets his mandate from the disputing parties, pays more attention to private interests than to public interests and the prohibition of arbitration of rights claims. Competition reflects this concern of governments. Also, governments are afraid of ignoring competition rules during arbitration.
Conclusion: It seems that it is possible to overcome the apparent conflict of competition and arbitration rights and justify the possibility of the coexistence of these two fields. In addition to the influence of the theory of judicial pluralism, which rejects the monopoly of the government in applying the rules of public order, in the interaction of arbitration and competition law, with the expansion of private lawsuits to claim damages caused by anti-competitive procedures in different legal systems, the possibility of coexistence of arbitration is also possible. And the rights of competition become more obvious.