With the rapid expansion of electronic interactions and the increasing complexity of digital environments, arbitration has attracted growing attention as an effective, expeditious, and specialized mechanism for the resolution of cyber disputes. At the same time, the specific nature of cyber crimes and disputes has heightened the need for effective judicial supervision over the arbitral process and arbitral awards. In this context, striking a balance between judicial control and the parties’ autonomy in arbitration constitutes one of the fundamental challenges and controversial issues in contemporary legal systems. Accordingly, the present study adopts a comparative approach to examine this balance in the legal systems of Iran and France, analyzing the scope, foundations, and effects of judicial supervision over arbitral awards in cases involving cyber crimes and cyber-related disputes, as well as assessing the compatibility of such supervision with the principle of party autonomy in both legal systems. The findings of the research, based on an examination of library sources, statutory laws, judicial decisions, and international instruments, indicate that in Iranian law, the scope of judicial supervision over arbitral awards particularly in cyber disputes is broader and more restrictive than in French law. This approach, in certain instances, undermines the principle of party autonomy and reduces the efficiency of arbitration. By contrast, the French legal system, with its strong emphasis on contractual freedom, generally limits judicial intervention to exceptional circumstances such as violations of public order and fundamental principles of due process. The results demonstrate that the extensive judicial supervision of arbitral awards in cyber disputes under Iranian law imposes greater constraints on party autonomy compared to French law and, in some cases, diminishes the effectiveness of arbitration. Conversely, by confining court intervention to exceptional cases, the French legal system has achieved a more appropriate balance between judicial supervision and arbitral independence. Accordingly, reducing unnecessary judicial interventions and drawing upon the French legal model may contribute to strengthening cyber arbitration in Iran. By focusing on the specific nature of cyber disputes, this research provides an analytical framework for reforming judicial practice and legislation in Iranian law.