Analyzing the commonalities and differences of the institution of temporary order with garnishment in Iran's legal system

Garnishment and temporary order raised in the margins of the main action and the plaintiff's right to obtain the demand in the event of a ruling in his favor at the end of the proceedings, are protected from damages due to the defendant's inability to implement the court order or his subsequent actions. The existence of many similarities between these two institutions raises the question in the mind, what is the reason for introducing two institutions for financial seizure of the defendant's property in Iran's legal system? Studies show that just as these two entities have similarities, they also have distinctive features that clearly identify the place of implementation and the border between the two, including: in order to issue a temporary order against the garnishment, in all cases, it is necessary to obtain a security to compensate the possible damages of the defendant; Or that the fulfillment of the garnishment always refers to the financial confiscation of the defendant's property, while the temporary order does not exclusively refer to this case, and it can also refer to the performance of the action or the refusal to perform the action, and most importantly, the power to "enforcement court ruling" is the ultimate purpose of garnishment, while the power to "deal with the main lawsuit" is the meaning and purpose of the temporary order. This research with a descriptive-analytical method seeks to justify the action of the legislator in predicting two separate institutions by extracting the similarities and differences between these two institutions in order to guarantee the possibility of executing the decree issued in the future.