جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « Judgement » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

The most important Judicial Act are crystallized in the form of "Judgement", but the previous (approved 1939) and current (approved 2000) Civil Procedure Law, as well as other related current laws, despite referring to this judicial act and even its examples in numerous articles, are devoid of any presentation the definition is about this. Therefore, the current research aims to identify the concept of " Judgement" with a descriptive-analytical method and with a comparative view, it examines the existing criteria to answer the question, what is the criterion for recognizing this act? Several criteria, both formal and substantive, have been presented to distinguish judicial acts from other (Administrative) actions in other countries, especially in France, which are the criteria for placing any one of them alone is not the answer to the problem as it should be. On this basis, in this research, while presenting the meaning of "Judgement" from a lexical and idiomatic point of view, we introduce and analyze the aforementioned criteria to reach the selected criteria. The findings of the present research indicate that a judicial act is considered a "Judgement" if it is issued by a judicial authority decisively and with the characteristic of being sued regarding a dispute arising from an uncertain legal situation.

Faqihs are from amongst people and have two distinct juridical and customary states. They sometimes engage with Fiqh (delivering rulings from religious sources) and issue religious rulings, while at other times they attend to general or particular customary affairs. Given that they enjoy authority in issuing rulings, judgment, and governance, what they have taken on in these three areas could be studied with regards to their different states- using the ideas and teachings of Imam Khomeini. This paper is trying to answer the question that while implementing their authority, on what occasions Faqihs utilize their juridical state and when they use their customary state. With a descriptive and analytic approach, this fundamental study comes to the conclusion that today Faqihs are often using their customary state in judgment and governance, whether limited - such as orphans' custody - or general - such as leadership and administration of the society - and only on rare occasions they may come to use their juridical state.

Originality is an essential requirement for the copyrightability of any artistic and literary work. Creative works are afforded copyright protection only if they are original. Originality has yet to be defined by international or national laws including Iranian Laws. The judicial interpretation of national laws also differ from one another and there is no consensus on the concept of Originality. Under traditional approach, Originality is often referred as to "labor and effort" or "self expression " of the author, whereas the more approach is that of "creativity " and exercise of "skill and judgment ". However, all legal systems recognize that the work must be independent and not copied from another work.The main question of this Article is which approach can strike a balance between author’s rights and public interest to cheap and easy access to artistic works. This article will examine originality under different jurisdictions and concludes the Canadian definition is the more appropriate approach to the said question. Finally, it suggests that the Iranian legislature shall replace the term “creativity” with “skill and judgment” in 14 of article 1 of the copyright bill.

Judges, in their position of dispute resolution and justice-enforcement, constantly depart the legislators’ intention, through interpretation, towards the valuable goal of justice and righteousness. However, they might walk dissimilar pathes in their journey which, in turn, might end up being seen as a threat to the valuable rule of law. However, we might be right in thinking that the judges’ interpretations cohere into a unity, plurality within unity, not merely through the legislation, or even legislator’s interference to create unification, but also, and even more importantly, through the power and coherence resulting from the common sense, which frames their understanding of law and fact. Commons sense, that is, the direct and self-evident understanding of common people from the existences, including the legal system, creates a coherent and powerful whole drawn upon the history and presence of man’s knowledge and contemplation. Such framework will, on the one hand, provide Judgement with coherence and attribution to social realism. On the other hand, though, will encumber the other function acclaimed by judgement, that is, justice and emancipation. Commons sense, thus, highlights the tension between the regulatory and emancipatory causes for the judicial theory.

Judges, in their position of dispute resolution and justice enforcement, constantly depart the legislators’ intention, through the means of interpretation, towards the valuable goal of justice and righteousness. However, they might walk dissimilar paths in their journey to righteousness which, in turn, might end up being seen as a threat to the respected value of rule of law. However, we might be right in thinking that the judges’ interpretations cohere into a unity, plurality within unity, through the power and coherence resulting from the common sense, which frames their understanding of both law and fact. This confinement to common sense, however, would could have judges surrender to majoritarianism and status quo. If common sense reinforces the status quo, marked by the power of majority, within the realm of judgement, this would hinder one of the demands of judgement, that is, emancipation. However, the position a judge is taking by involving in justice enforcement is not a mere position of dispute resolutions. He will always be availed to draw the just from law, common sense, and other legal rules.

Civil law has known each of the rescissions transferable to heir after the death of praepositus. This opinion has been attributed to jurisconsult's consensus but recent research will show that claim of being consentant of this judgement conflicts with disagreement of well-known jurisconsults in rescission of inheritance 1.Husband for wife, 2.Condition for alien, 3.primogeniture for except of big son, 4.session of sale with death of one of the parties of contract. Since the main way of validity and nullity deliberation of juridical issue is studying itsevidence so it should be studied juridical scope of evidence in inheritance option so that standpoint of twelve shiite muslims law acquires and presents from evidence in it. Recent article wants to do this and it has done it with the method of inference from valid sources of twelve shiite Muslims law and on the strength of library method. This subject-matter is important finding of this research.