A Survey of Proving Falsity of Oath in the Iranian and French Laws

In the legal proceeding، should an oathbe taken in case of lack of proof on the part of plaintiff، it would cause extinction of the claim of the plaintiff. Now، if it was proved that the oath has been false when the definite judgment has been issued، we encounter the problem of unlawfulness of reversal of judgment of the judge in jurisprudence and that of validity of what is judged in the Iranian and French laws. Majority of jurists hold that hadiths reveal that oath of the defendant renders all rights of the plaintiff as to the disputed property null، but should oath of the defendant be false he must naturally return the disputed property to the plaintiff. In case of confession of the oath taker to falsehood of his oath، he is legally obliged to return the property and all rights of the plaintiff، including the right to claim again، will return. In the French law، announcing falsehood of the oath after the verdict has been issued is considered among facets of re-trial، and in the Iranian law it can be treated as an instance of trickery، deception، and a facet of re-trial.