---

, The right of suspension entitles a contracting party to suspend the performance according to rules of law, contractual terms or as a result of force majeure. The same right may also be established as withholding the performance, according to the provisions of civil law in connection with contract of sale or other exchange contracts, until such time as the other party shows willingness to perform. Both rights are based on reciprocity of the contractual obligations and interconnection of the reciprocal obligations. The right of suspension of the performance has been recognized under the provision of the standard general conditions of contracting, as well as under some of Iranian multinational contracts. The suspension as a result of force majeure although is not expressly been envisaged under Iranian law of contracts, it is recognized by necessary implication of contract law rules. The right of withholding which is recognized under Iranian civil and commercial laws is mainly related to contracts with single performance, while the right of suspension is recognized in contracts that need to be performed during a gradual process. At the same time the legal standing of suspension was not clearly discussed under Islamic law literature but it had certainly been contemplated by Islamic law jurists in relevant situations. On the contrary the right of withholding has been expressly discussed. There are similarities between suspension provisions under FIDIC and the general contracting form. However, the differences are regarding the fact that under general conditions of contracting the right of suspension is mainly a unilateral right while under FIDIC form of the terms and conditions of exercising the right, Its duration, extension and damages arising out of suspension are contractually provided for. Consequently except for the difference in terms of contracts with one time performance or gradual performance, the legal nature of withholding and suspension is the same and one may apply the reasons and legal basis of withholding to suspension, admitting the fact that suspension is an independent legal concept.

---

In international construction contracts, in which huge financial, technical and human resources are needed, it is vital to solve all disputes at the site of project immediately. Dispute Adjudication Board (DAB) of the International Federation of Consulting Engineers or FIDIC which has been in use for a long time, particularly in the US, has remarkable success in avoiding prolonged arbitration or litigation. Board members are nominated by consensus at the time when the parties to the contract are focused on the agreement. They are independent with particular technical expertise appropriate to the contract. DAB is completely different from FIDIC’S old model construction contracts. DAB is close to arbitration and the enforcement of their decisions is almost similar. This is why legal evaluation of DAB’s decisions seems to be very important. There is no international convention for the enforcement of DAB decisions yet. However, finding ways to enforce them can accelerate the development of DAB in international contracts. Here the 1958 New York Convention as the most applicable and famous in the field of recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards can assist us in the procedure of evaluation and enforceability of those decisions. This article aims to study the development of DAB in one introduction, three main parts and a conclusion. Part One will show what a DAB is and discusses different kinds of DAB. Enforcement of DAB decisions will be looked at in Part Two. Finally, Part Three will review the possibility of applying the 1958 New York Convention to DAB decision. The Conclusion will follow with concluding remarks.