پژوهشنامه حقوق تطبیقی
پیاپی 2 (پاییز و زمستان 1394)

When the promissor breaches the contract, he must compensate all damages.There is a rule in UK law and Vienna convention on international sale of Goods that the Compensable loss is only the loss resulted from the breach, of Contract So, losses that the injured party can reasonably mitigate its scope are not recoverable. The existence of two factors are essential in applying the mitigation rule: breach of contract and the possibility of applying the rule by paying compensation as a sanction.

Although there are some serious controversies about governance quality, it is one of the most fundamental needs of human community which its necessity is confirmed by everyone. However, The main concern of all theorists is exercise of justice and prevention of despotism and dictatorship. Constitution of every County besides defining basic principles, structure, hierarchy, position and limits of state political authority, it determines and guarantees citizens rights and regulates power relations Among these, undoubtedly good governance is the most fundamental principle in defining and drawing basic rights.The Good governance is a new discourse which is defined by factors such as rule of law, participation, responsibility, accountability, transparency, efficiency and effectiveness. In recent years, good governance is Takan info Comsideration Good governance factors imply for which its exercise is needed to implement based on a national model.This study is trying to clarify good governance concept and factors and also take such factor into consideration in in Iran Constitution, to promote good governance in Iran, some recommendations have been mentioned.Research findings represent that each of good governance factors have been emphasized in Iran Constitution. To implement these factors, we have dealt with intensity of these indicators after Iran Revolution.

In order to clarify the relation between competition law (antitrust law) and unfair completion rules, this paper has examined the issue in two parts. In the first part, this paper has tried to examine concept, subject, purposes, foundations and background of both competition law and unfair completion rules. Based on the findings in the first section, it is shown that the issue is analyzed under three approaches: Uniformity, Supplementary and Independency. At the end, relying on national legislations, international documents, doctrines and legal analysis, the independency approach has been offered as an acceptable approach.

Since the first time, that is to say the codifying of the first Rules of the  Permanent Court of International Justice (hereinafter PCIJ) that the condition of counterclaims was included in 1922 up to now, the regulations as to these claims have been subjected to repeated amendments. Besides, the jurisprudence, through detecting existing lacunas regarding counterclaims, have could notably put this conception into change. According to the last version of the Rules of Court, admissibility of a counterclaim necessitates two conditions. First is the court’s jurisdiction, and the other is connection between the counterclaim the main claim. This article aims to investigate the evolutions emerged in this context in the light of Rules and jurisprudence of the PCIJ and International Court of Justice (hereinafter ICJ). Based on the last changes of the rules of court and giving the jurisprudence, it could be said that a counterclaim, in spite of being related to the main claim, is an independent claim which gives the respondent the opportunity and right to not only reject the plaintiff’s claim, but also introduce a new one.

International law is composed of the states and international organization having national sovereignty under which the structure of legal system is based. The lack of a guaranteed executive system make the international law with this doubt whether international law really exist. If exists, what is its executive mechanism and what is its subjects¢ motive. To relate the rules of international law to the issue of sanction in national legal systems and speculation of force as its inherent section has prepared the way for suspicion to the place of international law system. While, the unity and gradual change of national societies regarding legal rules legislation together with the sanction have been the product of an evolutionary process in the historical running. International law does not effectively enjoy of enough sanction and confrontation with the breach of international standards due to enjoyment of structural weakness, inadequacy of statute rules and multiplicity and diversity of new topics beyond classical issues. In spite of the absence of proper sanction the rules applicable to international community are binding and their usage affect the behavior of the states and in practice, the states also observe international law. In order to precise reflection of world community and to guarantee the observance of its regulations this field should merely be studied scientifically in the ventricle of international community.

The Freedoms enshrined in the Constitution are such importance for the citizens that any restrictions on them are prohibited absolutely. One of the most important restrictions on personal freedoms, is curfew that in most dictatorships and military who have seized power through a coup and undemocratic ways is applied to suppress on the individual freedom.  This matter is expressly prohibited in Iranian constitution and in the new constitution of Arabic Republic of  Egypt, it rejected due to the concept of Article 154 and only allowed the state emergency restrictions. Because both countries, have bitter experience of  martial law to suppress freedoms in their previous regimes. But the essential constraints in the Iranian constitution and the state emergency restrictions in the Arabic Republic of Egypt not prohibited and are permitted under special procedures. In Iran, it would form the government for temporary and to thirty days with the permission of the Parliament are permitted and renewal is depends on the approval of Parliament. In Egypt, the state emergency restrictions declared by the President with Citing to legal reasons and consultation with the Council of Ministers and approval of the House of Representatives and allowed up to three months. Extended this time also is depends on the approval of the House of Representatives. In this paper by a comparative perspective, we Seek mentioned issues by looking at the course of the pre-revolutionary laws and their views on issues of military rule between Iran and Egypt.

Declaration and announcement of the will and its various forms poses some problems; including if it is necessary that the offeree should be informed about acceptance? In other words, whether Informing the offeree of the acceptance is required for acceptance to take effect and also for contract to occur? Although being informed about acceptance is not a requirement for a contact to occur in the law of Iran; but in the law of England and Unidroit, the general rule is that declaration and communication of an acceptance are the main conditions for an effective acceptance which without them acceptance is not valid and no contact will get form. With regard to this general rule, in case of an offeror not being informed about acceptance, except in exceptional circumstances, such as a unilateral contract, offeror's negligence, communication by post, offer's circumstances and others, no contract will be concluded and as a result no obligation arises for him. Therefore, there are different approaches in different legal systems for announcement and communication of acceptance