The dissolution of a commercial company can be the result of many voluntary and involuntary causes. Except in case of division and merger, the dissolved company enters into the liquidation process and until its end, it maintains its legal personality, although its capacity is limited compared to the time before dissolution. Therefore, the company may need to start an action others or they may seek to bring an action against the company. Courts differ regarding whether the company or the liquidator should be considered the plaintiff or the defendant, and the court's entrance into the substance of the lawsuit depends on the plaintiff's luck; In such a way that in the first assumption, some courts consider the liquidator as the plaintiff and in case of a lawsuit in the name of the company, they do not hear the lawsuit. In the second assumption, there is a difference between the courts regarding the need to file a lawsuit against the company or the liquidator or both. It seems that the judicial anarchism in the case law is caused by disregarding the legal rules; Because according to the survival of the legal personality of the company, it is the claimant or the defendant of the lawsuit as it was before the dissolution of the company and the liquidator is only its representative, and except in special cases, there is no legal and logical basis for the claimant or the defendant to be considered a representative.