نشریه رای : مطالعات آرای قضایی
سال یازدهم شماره 3 (پیاپی 40، پاییز 1401)

Is the court authorized to hear the lawsuit to prove a testament that has been adjusted contrary to the formalities prescribed in the Probate Code (Ordinary Testament)? The answer to this question is important in that on the one hand, according to Article 291 of the Probate Code, a will that is made without considering the formalities provided in this Code is not acceptable in any of the official authorities, and on the other hand with the developments after the enactment of the Probate Code, including the views of the Constitutional Council and the amendments to the Civil Code, the possibility of invalidity of the above provision is raised. In answer to this question, by studying a new sentence issued by one of the civil courts of Tehran, by a library method, this article wants to prove the hypothesis that even after these developments, the lawsuit to prove the ordinary testament can not be heard; because, firstly, the views of the Constitutional Council are not capable to permit to hear such a lawsuit, and secondly, the amendments to the Civil Code on the evidence and the modification of the maximum validity of documents also can not alter the well-founded situation of the Probate Code.

The possibility of issuing a writ of execution without substantive consideration by the court for a check that has been faced with non-payment is one of the innovations of the law amending the law on issuing checks in 1397. According to these amendments, Article 23 states that "non-guarantee" of checks is one of the conditions for issuing a court order. On the other hand, before this time, the issuance of a writ of execution by the registration authorities was provided for in Article 2 of the said law, but "non-guarantee" was not mentioned as one of the conditions for the issuance of this writ of execution; Following this issue, the General Assembly of the Court of Administrative Justice, in its decision No. 2958, annulled the "Procedure for accepting the request for the implementation of the provisions of the required official documents ..." which does not consider the "guarantee" of the check to prevent the issuance of registration. In this study, while explaining the differences between the enforcement agencies mentioned in Articles 2 and 23 of the Check Issuance Law, the objections of the arguments presented in the said ruling are discussed and finally, in accordance with the above-mentioned procedure, a check is issued for issuing a registered enforcement order. Is.

Due to a dispute between the branches of the Court of Administrative Justice regarding the jurisdiction of this institution about legal claims on behalf of Shahed University, a unanimous decision was finally issued, citing the "Law on the List of Public Institutions" and the "Statute of Shahed University". The university was recognized as a public institution affiliated with the Martyr Foundation. However, "Article 3 of the Civil Service Management Law" states in a definition of a public Institutions: "A public Institutions is a specific organizational unit that: 2. More than fifty percent of its annual budget should be provided from non-governmental sources; "Is responsible for duties and services that have a public aspect." First, the university is not approved by parliament; Because this university has been established by Article 1 of its statute in line with the historical decree of Imam Khomeini. Secondly, despite the stipulation of Article 4 of the Shahed University Statute on the financing of the University by the Shahed Foundation, a review of the budget text of previous years indicates that the entire university budget in a specific row (No. 120100) in the budget law And is in charge of the state treasury; While the second part of Article 3 of the law stipulates that more than fifty percent of its annual budget should be provided from public Institutions sources. Therefore, considering the delay of the "Civil Service Management Law adopted in 2007" compared to the "Law on the List of Public Institutions adopted in 1994" and the great importance of providing resources and its amount in the recently approved law, it seems that the university can not be included in the scope. He considered public institutions as non-governmental and affiliated with the Martyr of the Islamic Revolution Foundation.

Betrayal of the property entrusted to the detriment of the owner or possessor, which is realized in the form of one of the four behaviors of use, appropriation, loss or loss, is called betrayal of the trust. In common property, according to the definition of civil law and the recognition of jurists, the partner or partners are partners in all components of property. Considering that "being another" must be established in crimes against property; The realization of the crime of betrayal of trust in common property has been questioned and has led to disagreements between lawyers on the other hand and the source of procedural differences in the courts. This doubt is exacerbated when the legislator has provided for the commission of the crime of theft in common property in Article 277 of the Islamic Penal Code. In addition, in the case of destruction, the vote of unity of procedure 10 - 1355/7/21 recognizes the realization of this crime in the common property . To this end, we decided to use a descriptive analytical method and using library resources. Also, by looking at the judicial opinions, we should look for a basis so that we can end the disputes and fragmentation of opinions in this regard and the principles; It is the protection of the victim; Maintaining public order; Criminal protection of individual property; We found fairness and justice and lack of special characteristics in the destruction and theft and the crime of betrayal of trust in the common property.

The consideration of any dispute and the issuance of votes is subject to the determination of the issues or matters that determine the outcome of the proceedings. These matters have been mentioned in some of the judges' opinions. But what is the meaning of the preamble or pillar of the lawsuit and what effect do they have on the outcome of the trial? Based on what has been mentioned in this article, two types of preamble to litigation should be considered: general preamble and specific preamble to litigation. The general premise is all that is necessary for a fair and just hearing in the litigation, which must be present in every litigation, as if the plaintiff had a legal position. Specific arrangements are also a special precondition for the consideration of any lawsuit, which is determined by the nature of the lawsuit and is dedicated to the same lawsuit, as if in a lawsuit for money arising from commercial documents, the deadline for claiming the document has arrived. Regarding the elements, according to the findings of this article, the elements of litigation are matters that the judge enters into the nature of the litigation in order to establish them, while examining the evidence, and after establishing them, he must issue a verdict on the lawsuit, whether it is a verdict on the plaintiff or convicted. The two criteria of compensability and substantive or formal consideration are also described as criteria for separating the pillar from the specific introduction. In this descriptive-analytical method, this article seeks to specify the concepts of the preamble and the pillars of the lawsuit while pointing and criticizing several votes, and to standardize the guarantee of the absence of any of the mentioned concepts, and finally to provide criteria for identifying the preamble of the pillars.

Public law is an issue that the drafters of the constitution, as specified in the second paragraph of principle 156, have assigned revival of it to the judiciary. On this basis, the prosecutor, as the main trustee of the revival of public rights, monitors, pursues and restores these rights. The right to safe drinking water is one of the most basic human rights that is a public right. The practice of the prosecutor's office also shows that numerous follow-ups have been carried out in the field of restoration of this right in terms of public rights. Meanwhile, the order of the Bahar city prosecutor's office in pursuing the pollution of drinking water in several villages of this city is noteworthy. This article has tried to evaluate and critique the order and actions of the mentioned prosecutor in this field with a descriptive-analytical method. Therefore, the obtained result shows that the actions taken by the prosecutor are desirable and indicate the realization of the crime of threatening public health. However, the main objection to the prosecutor's order can be considered as the lack of specification on the enforcement guarantee, assuming that the prosecutor's order is revoked and the non-determination of criminal enforcement guarantee. Of course, this is more rooted in the flaws in the existing laws and regulations than in the prosecutor's office.

the legal first courts have general competence in description of sort of decree. in fact, it is power to determine into the courts regarding discretion to be description of decree. however, judge with the fact that he enter into substantive issue or avoidance of it may decide on the judicial decision. text of article 299 of general and revolution law at civil affairs (1379) is useful of this matter.