نشریه پژوهش های حقوق ثبت
پیاپی 2 (پاییز و زمستان 1401)

 There is no end to the dispute over the admissibility of a claim for proof of ownership of immovable property in the jurisprudence. On the other hand, there are situations in which the plaintiff has to go to court and has no choice but to do so. The general duty of the courts to hear cases also necessitates a hearing. The subject of the present study is the examination and classification of forms of property proof lawsuits that may be raised in court at any of the stages of property registration. The consideration and issuance of a ruling in each of these forms has its own special effects. This research has been done in a descriptive and analytical manner based on library sources and the use of judicial opinions issued. Seeks to reduce clients.

In the old registered administrative system, the location of real estate was determined by addresses, which was a very difficult task to determine the exact boundaries of the property, and in the administrative affairs related to the property, the rights of many citizens were lost and some were unjustly occupied. The master plan has been quite successful in most countries. In our country, this responsibility was entrusted to the State Registration and Documents Organization, the administrative part of the judiciary, which, after several years, did not achieve complete success in measuring property. This descriptive-analytical study seeks to investigate the nature and legal effects of logging in the country's registered administrative system and to identify the reasons for the failure of this legislative challenge in the comprehensive logging law. Despite the legal explicitness of the need to determine the boundaries of all property in the country, unfortunately, this action has not been realized so far. While in developed countries, all aspects of land management and registration are considered and they benefit from the benefits of multi-purpose cadastre implementation in all organizations and organs. On the other hand, demarcation affairs in Iran are entrusted to the Registry and Documents Organization, which is an administrative institution under the jurisdiction of the judiciary. This helped.

Based on the legal status of a cotract, it may be subject to one of the following conditions: validity, invalidity, corruption, non-existence, non-influence. Some of these legal situations may turn into new situations; Among other things, if a valid contract is annulled by the judgment of a judicial authority, it means that it becomes a void contract. In French law, judicial annulment is accepted as a general rule (with one exception) in cases where the legal action is subject to the status of nullity (both absolute and relative); However, in Iranian law, there is no such necessity in invalid legal acts, and in general, the annulment of a valid legal act by the judgment of a judicial authority is considered an exceptional matter, and it is realized only in cases of future property and annulment of official documents. Therefore, with a comparative study of the two legal systems of Iran and France, we will find that although the institution of "judicial annulment" is the same in nature in both systems and as a result, some of its effects are common, but the difference in the examples has caused specific effects, the most important of which is the regressive effect of judicial annulment in French law, while in Iranian law, the annulment effect looks to the future and does not spread to the past.

There is disagreement in jurisprudence about the validity of litigation or the demand for proof of ownership. Some courts accept such a lawsuit and others issue a non-hearing order. Despite some legal research and judicial efforts, the current issue is still relevant and a well-established scientific perspective has not been formed. In this article, while explaining the issue in a preliminary way, the opinions of the proponents and opponents of the validity of such a claim and the critique of each are briefly presented. Then, an example of a judicial procedure based on opposing the validity of the mentioned lawsuit is given and analyzed. In the end, For reasons such as attention to the existence of a legal dispute in ownership, referring to the decision of ownership in some laws and the non-contradiction of the proceedings of such a lawsuit with the jurisdiction of the state registration office and other reasons, a detailed summary of the author on the validity of the claim for proof of ownership is presented except in exceptional cases and as a result of the superiority of the opinions of those in favor of the validity of the said claim.

 Changing the usage of agricultural lands which has been set out for about 60 years has been increased anxiously in recent decades and it is regarded as an essential barrier for sustainable development and food safety. Hence optimum utilization and production from lands specially agricultural lands are governments and people crucial missions as a power supply and assurance of human life continuance. The conclusion of this study is that governments are able to put limitations on people ownership rights of agricultural lands restriction on public profits moreover confirming some changes in agricultural lands is permission conditional on reducing from jurisdiction cases. Disobedience to legal limitations will end in civil and criminal responsibilities. But predicted civil and criminal sanctions of changing usage of agricultural lands rules in our country have some defects, therefore these defects are useful for offenders.

One of the important issues about real estate transactions is the opposition between certificate and normal document. Since the owner of posterior certificate has made a deal with trust on registration system and during the legal process. On the other hand, the buyer with preceding normal document has made a deal according to freedom principle and the rule of will and for his claimant has religious evidence. In this research according to existed sources and analytical descriptive method we have reviewed the jurists of the guardian council idea in the assembly of the guardian council about the validity of normal document of real estate transactions when there is an opposition with certificate and articles 22, 46, 47 and 48 of property registrations law with religious evidence and the legislator attempt to ratify '' formal credential promotion plan'' in a form based on saving and promoting social and economical order and to be right of certificate theory and public trust doctrine is justifiable according to jurisprudential reasoning of mentioned council and corrupt tally of opposition of normal document and certificate and necessity of judicial security and promoting order of society.

The difference in the nature of the notary institution in the two systems of "Latin Notary" and "Notary Public" has led to differences in the legal principles governing the behavior of notaries and as a result, differences in the legal effects of this institution in these two notary systems. Therefore, it is necessary to study the difference in the legal principles governing these two systems to understand the exact nature of notary institutions. This raises the question about the roots and foundations of the difference between these two notary systems in terms of governing principle. The present study uses a descriptive-analytical method and a comparative approach, while examining the concept, position and Foundation of the three principles of "neutrality", "independence" and "confidentiality and secrecy of information" as important legal principles governing the notary institution in these two notarial systems, It has been concluded that the difference in the position of Latin Notaries and notary Publics as public officers and the difference in the legal nature of notarial services provided in the Latin notary system and notary public system, has led to differences in governing principles and how to regulate the notary institution in these two systems, so Latin notaries are absolutely neutral, independent and confidential when performing notarial services, but notary publics are required to observe the principle of impartiality and independence only when they appear in the position of public officers and their services are of a public nature and These principles do not apply to their other legal roles.

Deeds and property registration services are one of the most important aspects of providing public services, which should never be delayed or closed. In this regard, the notary public alternative institution is looking for a way to ensure the acceleration and continuity of public services so that the said services are not solely dependent on a specific person. The question that arises here is what is the structure of the appropriate legislative approach in the field of the notary public alternative institution. In response, it is stated as a hypothesis that the identification of the field of intervention, transparent and appropriate to the position of public service provision, forms the structure of the appropriate legal system in this field. In this regard, the studies and explorations carried out in this research show that Iran's legislator has not chosen a transparent and proportionate approach in the field of the notary public alternative institution. Thus, determining the scope of ambiguous jurisdiction and not recognizing the necessary independence is considered to be one of the most important harms of the Iranian legislative system in the field of notary public sponsorship. On the other hand, by identifying and establishing a personal and corporate notary system, the French legislator has been able to eliminate many shortcomings and inadequacies caused by the individual notary system. During this research, relying on the descriptive and analytical study method, an attempt is made to draw a suitable legislative system in the face of the mentioned institution by examining and comparing the performance of the legislative systems of Iran and France in the field of the notary public alternative institution.

One of the most important economic assets that causes many disputes for people in the society is real estate. For this reason, advanced legal systems have established special regulations to organize ownership documents. In Iran's legal system, despite the passage of a long time and the passing of several laws, which is the last will of the legislator under the title "The Law of Permanent Decrees of the Country's Development Programs", an objective and specific criterion has not yet been provided regarding the validity of official documents. Legal doctrines have also analyzed the angle of this legal challenge, and sometimes they have tried to provide a solution by referring to other legal systems. The judicial procedure has also become confused in such a way that it could not fulfill its mission, which is to remove ambiguity and prevent the issuing of contradictory opinions. The present study intends to answer the question with a descriptive-analytical method, that in order to identify the absolute validity of notary documents against normal documents, it is necessary to refer to the origin of the issuance of the ownership document? Considering the lack of legal resources, the most logical solution is to amend the law. But until then, by interpreting the principles of the set of laws and taking into account the privileges of notarial documents, an objective and specific criterion should be determined as a rule to solve the current legal challenge, which is the identification of notarial credit in an absolute way. This credit can be violated only in cases of legal authorization. Contrary to the opinion of some jurists, the recognition authorities, regardless of the origin of issuing documents, must independently give legal validity to official documents of ownership and in cases of ambiguity, interpret the laws in favor of validating notarial documents.