فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق خصوصی
سال پنجاهم شماره 1 (بهار 1399 )

Right of exploitaitionis known as one of the person's relationship to property by civil code and is counted endowment and lien contracts as causes of it. Analysis of the nature of loan shows that the result of the loan contract is also right of exploitaition, although civil code has not seat the loan contract on side contracts those creator the right of exploitaition. Because the nature of right of exploitaition nothing except credit domination on the right of exploitaition of substance and also permission of owner in the loan contract, is dominant the borrower on right of exploitaition.Article 92 has spoken of the right of exploitaitionby legislator's permission in the exploitaition of resources and common.If we don’t know the loan contract creator of exploitaition, we will be faced with deadlock to determine the type of relationship that comes from it. Because in 29 article has not predicted relationship except ownership and right of exploitaition. Revocable of loan contract and binding of lien contract and endowment do not make fundamental difference in the result of these, as irrevocable in the free peace and revocable in the gift will not cause that these two contracts be different in the result (ownership). Also famous jurists later have asserted that the result of loan contract is the right of exploitaitionas general endowment and lien contracts. We should not be wrong license of exploitaition or charging legal permission that is a charging legal law with right of exploitaitionor correlative permission that is a correlative law.

There is a disagreement on the management of specific endowments without a trustee. Some jurists, recognizing the ownership right for the beneficiaries, believe that the management of the endowment is an integral part of it and exclusive management of the endowment are with the beneficiaries. But most jurists in the last two centuries consider the rights of future beneficiaries as standard. They consider the administration of affairs that is related to all the beneficiaries, as the ruler’s authority. In the Iranian law, in the beginning, the first opinion was chosen. But later on, the second view came to the fore. However, the practical procedure of the Organization of the Endowments and the judicial process of the courts accept the first view and it has continued until now. Whereas, the second opinion and its basis are accepted in the new legislations. Therefore, it is necessary to change the practical and judicial procedure.

Abstract Strict liability relies on the goals like efficient allocation of resources, distribution of risk, deterrence and consumer expectations. These goals in a generally speaking cannot be achieved because of the structural differences between new and used product markets. Naturally in used product markets, consumers expect lower price and quality. In addition to the existing conflict between the nature of this market and strict liability, it will not provide more secure goods. As a result, in the relationship between used product sellers and injured persons, the theory of negligence will provide greater social benefits unless the seller's conduct causes the expectation that the risk of used product is not higher than the new one.

By studying legal texts, doctrine and jurisprudence of Iran, several examples can be found in which non-opposability, not as proof of the dispute, but as existence of legal elements, has been talked about. This concept of non-opposability, that is a kind of legal sanction, despite the reflection and use in domestic law, remains unclear and no exact conceptualization has been made. Moreover, the position of this sanction, along with other legal sanctions in the domestic system, is not clear, and as a result of this ambiguity, the effectiveness and application of this sanction in domestic law, due to the confusion of this concept with existing concepts, has sometimes been questioned or rejected. This study seeks on the one hand by defining the concept of non-opposability in its origin, it means French law, clear this concept in Iran law and on the other hand, by comparing this legal institution with similar concepts and the distinct boundaries of concepts, explain the position of this sanction in domestic law and prevents from confusion of existing concepts in this field.

Judicial style in the sense of studying the style markers of law texts in comparison with literary style has some limitations. Judicial judgements in the light of its features can be an interesting object for stylistic study. Moreover, recognizing the limitations and legal style, we want to know about what the style markers of Iranian judgement are and the reason of this style, as well also if it is possible Iranian judges to have a special style in their judgments or not. Results of this study have shown that judicial style despite of some limitations known as important. Furthermore current style of writing the opinions in Iran by considering the reasons that cause it to appear, is imitation style of French model, especially concerning that Iranian judge, like other procedural grounds, can´t find a pattern in Islamic law to write a judgement. However, there are some judges who have special style in writing. the styles are apart from their quality are considerable.

The Acquisition is to take the control of managing other companies by purchasing the majority of voting stocks, in order to eliminate the inefficient management. Creating value and expanding shareholders wealth, as two important economic goals, is the goal of taking over another company. Nevertheless, it should be understood whether, in practice, considering the incentives of managers to acquire, will applying this strategy lead to the creation of value and the increase of the wealth of the company's shareholders? The hypothesis in this research is a negative answer to the above question, explaining the reasons for it and the need to support the shareholders in the acquiring companies.

Under Iranian Civil Procedure Act, claimant, when making Action, has to determine the cause of his/her Action. While according to the paramount opinion in Shiit Jurisprudence, principally the whole Actions have to be heard even when cause of Action has not indicated. From this view point, as a rule, it is the court that is bound, at the commencement of hearing, to explore the cause of Action and on that basis, makes judicial decision. By accepting this opinion which has been applied in some court's decisions, in addition to respecting the fourth principle of Iranian Constitution, it is possible to transfer the subject of determination and achievement of cause of Action, from the section of formal conditions of petition to the section of hearing bars which naturally results in changing the decision making authority from court clerk to judge. In French law, although the phrase "cause of Action" has not been used and defined in civil procedure Act and jurist has expressed different opinions in the matter, according to that Act, claimant is obliged to indicate legal and subjective bases of Action.

Iran's law on the Nationality of Iranian-born mothers has undergone some changes. By reviewing the process of amending the rules in this area we can get: The legislator has faced the dilemmaof the preference for "macroeconomic and governance interests" and "people's interests."So that in dealing with the issue of the Nationality of Iranian-born mothers, they first consider the absolute interests of their sovereignty, but due to the problems caused by this absolute and dogmatic approach by the legislator and even the government itself, it is considering paying attention to the interests of the people and the use of The legal and analytical method to deal with the issue of Nationality of these individuals. In this research, the weaknesses and strengths of various developments and efforts of the legislator and the government are explained and described. The results of this study indicate that both the initial dogmatic approach and the recent analytical efforts are facing extremism.

The structure of civil liability law places great challenges on the civil accountability. The hard challenges of inertia, irreconcilability, indifference in the legislature's behavior come about from civil liability law. Therefore, they have said that they will not be able to answer the questions themselves in order to prevent civilian accountability and not to be happy about libelous litigation But civil justice calls for sovereign sovereignty to respond to civil responsibility in their pernicious behavior. The Liability organization and its triumphant principles (the "principle of civil accountability" and "the principle of accountability of all the stinging heads"), with all its glorious structure to the basic tools of the "blame" and "inadmissibility", put the rulers at the foot of the trial to equalize the "balance" Civil society "between lost and the Legislators trespassing. The theme of professional misconduct by lawmakers is another. In France, liability emerged from state regulation by the Blanco (1873) and Couitéas (1923) government council, which led to the accountability vote for L'Fleurette (1938) of the law-abiding law of the Parliament; In Iran, for ordinary law-makers, defying the general (religious) and the fundamental law is "violation of the previous mandate", and it is a civil shame (Article 72). In the " unfair legislature " and "abandoning the pernicious perceptions of the ninth", the harmful regulations of the state based on the fundamental right to appeal, and Article 173 and paragraph 1 of Article 10 and its note (the principle of preventing loss) and Article 11 (the annulment of decisions of public authorities and restitution to the status The former) from the Act of administrative justice, "guilty civil liability" in organized harmful decisions: "The principle of guilty civil liability blames the boundaries of the principle of" civil immunity "of the ruling rulers."

Although an employee can prosecute his employer for non-enforcement of its wage condemnation according to article 185 of Labor Law and via he choses a penal sanction but legislator have not foreseen an article in Labor Law about civil sanction of Late Payment Indemnity of wage or condemnation of it in Employee & Employer Conflict Resolution Commission and so this silence occurred conflict of judgments in our courts and consequently in our Supreme Court’s Chambers. Finally, Supreme Court by its Unification Judgment Number 757 held that adjudication about this kind of sanction is under jurisdiction of Civil Tribunals and this claim is out of authority of that special Commission (EECRC). We believe that this Unification Judgment is consistent by the nature of Employee & Employer Conflict and so it cannot be properly justified by Principles of Labor Law.