مجله حقوق خصوصی
پیاپی 36 (بهار و تابستان 1399)

The general rule in Common Law is that, any person may obtain different insurance policies for same subject matter and same risk and he is free to claim payment from all insurers in a way he thinks proper, however; the insurer, who has compensated damage and loss, can call on other insurers to bear their share of loss, this right is called the principle of Contribution. When an insurer is entitled to recover contribution from other insurers, there is a question of how that contribution is to be assessed, there is three methods of calculation. 1. Maximum Potential Liability 2. Independent Actual Liability 3. Common Liability

Compensation in the form of payment of a sum of money is the most important function of civil liability law, through which efforts are made to establish the lost position of the injured party at the expense of the liable person. Nevertheless, disgorgement damages has been introduced in civil liability law in the common law system in order to achieve the objective of deterrence. In this way, and contrary to the compensatory or remedial remedies, the gains received by the defendant are considered, and the measure of assessment of this remedy is the benefit he earned as a result of committing the wrongful act. This damage is based on several principles, including deterrence and to prevent unjust-enrichment. This kind of damages is applied in a wide range of areas, such as violations of human rights and confidentiality, torts such as usurpation, deception, fraud, slander, threats. In the Iranian civil liability system, there are cases that seem to be examples of disgorgement damages, but considering the fact that liability in Iranian law is basically based on the damages to the plaintiff, disgorgement damage in the strict sense is not acceptable.

Legal norms are a tool for regulating relations between legal subjects, so the more complex the relationship between legal subjects, the more complex the legal norms will be. On the other hand, one of the main concerns in the legal field is the logical order of the norms. That is why the existence of disorder in the set of legal norms has always been criticized by lawyers. The cause of termination of obligations is one of those legal concepts that has been widely criticized by lawyers and legal writers for its design and discipline under Article 264 of the Civil Code. In the present study, which has been written in a descriptive and analytical way, it will be seen that in the light of the legal formalism approach and fuzzy logic governing the relations between legal subjects and through the first legal norms, the cause of extinguishing obligations and Article 264 of the Civil Code as a whole, which have a logical order, have been designed and enacted.

Second life is an important virtual world that due to its unique features like the ability to create diverse literary and artistic works has created a variety of legal issues. Given the existing terms of service of this website with its residents, its agreement and open source licenses may seem to be similar. However, the differences cause distinguishing them. Since the creation of works in second life is done using its facilities, it is very important to determine the owner of such works. In addition, the way these works are protected by users and the application of conditions of copyright protection to them should be examined. The results of this article show that only the user should be considered as the author and owner of original literary and artistic works created in second life. As one of the drawbacks of this website, one may say that the survival of literary and artistic works of second-life users is dependent on the will of owners on which parties have agreed on. Hence, it prevents the former from taking action against latter.

Nowadays, in the framework of private law, most legal systems prefer to provide remedies and compensation to an injured person in violation of law or breach of contractual undertakings. The amount of the award limits to the loss of the injured. However, in some cases the injured person rather than seeks the incurred remedies or compensation, it seeks the restitution of the benefit that wrongdoer has gained by breach of victim’s rights. Although focusing on the gain-based liability instead of loss-based liability has been considered in Common Law for a long time but it is controversial as to the foundations of restitution for wrongs. With the descriptive-analytical method, the article explains the concept and definition of restitution for wrongs. While it illustrates some foundations of restitution for wrongs, it examines the foundation of such an institution in the Iranian Legal System. The article shows corrective justice cab be considered a foundation for restitution for wrongs in Common Law. Also, the rule “No man shall profit from his wrong”, the Lucrative Fault and social interests in tort law may provide the solution to accept the institution in Iranian Law.

The request for issuance of duplicate property ownership from Property and Deeds Registration Office is the owner of property logical reaction in case of property deed loss. Because of increasing use of software in the Property and Deeds Registration Organization and printing of property ownership in one sheet and enactment of article 120 of regulation of the Law on Registration of Deeds and Real Estate (1317) and its amendment in 1380 have caused challenges for registration offices. In this research, we have studied challenges of issuing duplicate property ownership according to the new technology policy of Property and Deeds Registration Organization and its incompatibility with article 120 of regulation of the law on Registration of Deeds and Real Estate and also some rules of jurisprudence by analytical descriptive method, according to available sources and practical method in registration units. The result is that existing method causes the procrastination and imposing additional cost on property owner. Because of that, legislator should update article 120 and its notes to homogenize process of issuing one sheet duplicate property ownership, reducing waste of time and unnecessary costs for applicants.

“Promise for others” is a legal entity whereby the parties to a contract make a specific commitment to be performed by a third party not involved in the conclusion of the contract. In the arbitration agreement, the parties assign their disputes resolutions to a third party not involved in the conclusion of their agreement. By developing the view that an arbitration agreement can be a promise for others, this article seeks to analyze and adapt these two types of contractual relationships with each other. In this regard, it can be assumed that only if the arbitrator has been designated in the arbitration agreement, such a relationship can be considered a promise for others.

The principle of non-interference of the court in arbitration is considered as one of the important principles governing arbitration. According to principle, which is considered as a result of principle of rule of will, arbitration is an independent institution and court is not allowed to interfere in arbitration. In general, although this principle is often defended in arbitration, most legal systems principle is not absolute and in some cases the benefits of court intervention in arbitration could not be ignored. Because in some cases, achieving the goals of arbitration requires intervention of court. The involvement of court in arbitration for purpose of assistance can be seen in structure and formation of arbitral tribunal, as well as issues related to nature of arbitration. Accordingly, court's involvement in arbitration could be divided into substantive and formal matters. Effectiveness of arbitration process and proper guidance and organization of arbitration process are among principles of jurisdiction of court to assist in arbitration in Iranian legal system. It is proposed that in order to prevent unwarranted interference by the court in arbitration in Iranian law, the cases of court intervention should be limited to ones specified in law. This issue is taken into account in UNCITRAL Model Law.

According to well-known or unanimous view in jurisprudence and Iran's civil law, mortgage of debt is null and void, however; mortgage of considerable part of commercial documents, is mortgage of debt which is considered in force and binding based on banking system’s, economic and commercial practice. In case of not application of nullity of mortgage of debt to mortgage of commercial documents, we encounter this problem that mortgage of commercial documents could not be examined and analyzed based on civil and Islamic mortgage contract. Therefore, the questions are what the solution of this problem is and based on what Islamic and civil institution the mortgage of commercial documents could be analyzed and to what extent such action is true and legal. Present research considers this case from jurisprudence and statute law and provide the proper solution based on Islamic and Iran's law.

According to the rules governing the legal system of intellectual property, every beneficiary has the right to challenge the validity of patents in competent authorities. Jurists, in response to the legitimacy of this right in license agreements, in addition to relying on the principle of contractual freedom, consider public interest and the rules of competition law. General Policy Reform Act of Principle 44 of the Constitution, while prohibiting the imposition of anti-competition clauses on the contract parties, assigns the determination of which to the Competition Council. The potential power of illegitimate incentives and the monopoly of licensors to create anxiety in American business seem so serious that judges express the deviation from the general rules and principles of the common law and Stoppel doctrine. Although formation of the Lear Doctrine in the American Legal System indicates the relative desirability of US judges' efforts to balance the general rules of contract at common law with public interest and anti-trust rules, it seems the most accurate way to determine the legitimacy of the clause is case study.

The "General Principles of law" have always been the important source of transnational commercial law that their scope has expanded in line with the development of transnational law, so that today it embodies two types, including "common principles" between legal systems and "specific principles" of international trade. In international law, "General principles of law" as norms that are rooted in national legal systems, obtained through "comparative" studies by international judges and in accordance with Article 38 of the ICJ statute, they are source of international law. Because of their "supranational character" and "dual nature" that stemming from their fundamental personality, these principles have the potential to be present in any legal system, including transnational commercial law. They enter into transnational commercial law through "comparative" method and “codification-based” method; thus, to resolve transnational commercial disputes, the arbitrators are using common principles as result of the studies of international judges. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the role of "general principles of law" in linking transnational law to international law and to this end, the "nature" of the general principles and their “entrance” in transnational law are discussed by analyzing the theories and arbitral awards. The finding of this paper is that the general principles of transnational commercial law are the same general principles of law which recognized by civilized nations as source of international law; these have been entered into transnational commercial law by the actors of international law and in the accepted forms of international law.

There are different opinions about the application of competition law on the banking system. Many scholars do not consider the banking system to be subject to competition law because they consider the competition as a threat to the stability and security of the banking system. In contrast, some scholars believe in the exercise of competition law in the banking system. It is impossible to fully implement competition law in the banking sector due to the inherent characteristics of the banking system. Competition in the banking system increases efficiency and innovation in service delivery, however; stability is essential to maintain confidence. These purposes are not always consistent. The present paper seeks to examine the theories proposed in this field and the suggested solutions in American law to examine the interaction of competition law on the one hand and the policies of maintaining stability on the other hand regarding the merger of banks. The results of the study indicate lack of attention to the requirements and specific features of the banking system in the application of competition law on the merger of banks in the Iranian legal system.