Disputes in the banking industry, especially at the international level, are inevitable given banks' vast and growing role in domestic and global economic relations. The rulings issued by domestic and foreign judicial authorities in international disputes and the status of implementing them indicate that Iranian banks have confronted many legal challenges due to envisaging the judicial approach to disputes or failure to specify dispute resolution methods in the contracts. Facing these challenges in practice compelled the banks to seek changes in current procedures.
Based on this and to maintain the legal security of Iranian banks, this study reviews conventional dispute resolution methods and adapts religious jurisprudential capacities to international legal standards to propose solutions based on banking system experiences. The results show that relying on referral to judicial authorities as a prevalent method of dispute resolution is not the only possible solution. Furthermore, none of the dispute resolution methods, both judicial and non-judicial, is flawless, and they cannot fully meet all the expectations and demands of the litigants of a dispute resolution method. Therefore, it is more appropriate to use multi-stage dispute resolution terms in banking disputes as it can proportionately meet the demands of banks by having the possibility of filtering, retaining assertiveness along with expertise, carrying less adverse effects on the mutual relationship of parties, and therefore, maintaining the friendly relations between them.