The Arbitrability of Proving Real Estate Ownership and the Inability to Benefit from Property: A Legal and Jurisprudential Study

Abstract

This study aimed to identify the nature of arbitration and its admissibility in matters of proving real estate ownership and the inability to benefit from it, while examining the impact of public order and the legal force of periodic agency in proving ownership. The study adopted a descriptive analytical approach to present issues with legal inference and objective jurisprudential treatment. The study reached several results, including: arbitration is an alternative method accepted legally and religiously in financial matters reconcilable and not violating public order; registration in the official department is a constitutive element for transferring real estate ownership, not merely a validity condition; and periodic agency does not constitute a title of ownership before official execution, making matters of proving registered real estate ownership outside the scope of arbitration due to their relation to public order. The study recommended clarifying boundaries between arbitrable and non-arbitrable disputes, specializing arbitrators' training, raising awareness about the effect of periodic agency, and reviewing relevant legislation. The study's originality lies in addressing a complex legal issue intersecting jurisprudential aspects with legislative texts, filling a knowledge gap regarding arbitration limits in real estate disputes under public order and registration constraints.