فصلنامه حقوق اسلامی
سال بیستم شماره 4 (پیاپی 79، زمستان 1402)

When some of the claimants are unavailable or dont initiate a lawsuit, the murder lawsuit may be raised in several stages and the outcome of the claims can be different and the question is whether claims should be considered independently or linked together? Article 325 of the Islamic Penal Code (adopted in 1392) considered them independent.It seems that this article is acceptable only in order to make a claim by different claimants in several stages, but those claims should not be considered independently. In some cases, conflict of evidence occurs and the legal provision needs to be reformed. In other words in multiple cases with a single subject, if the evidence in the second case had a different outcome to the first one, the result will not be acceptable based on that the cases are independents and criminal proceedings have been completed. It is necessary to evaluate the evidence of two or more related cases together.

types of non-Muslim groups; The challenge of legislative expression and the structure of the legal system:The system that governs social interaction and the position of non-Muslims in Islamic societies and how to explain such a system is significant from various dimensions. The course of these developments in explaining the interactive system; It includes the contractual arrangement based on the obligation contract to the legal arrangement based on the citizenship relationship, but the important challenge that has been reflected in the language of the law and stated in Article 310 of the Islamic Penal Code; It represents the discursive distance of the legislator with the structure of the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Such an expression is not in accordance with the objective space and reality of the legal structure and public law, and faces forms of inconsistency and misalignment of expression and structure, as well as practical ambiguity.The present article seeks to analyze and investigate the challenge of legislative expression and the structure of the legal system in explaining the non-Muslim guilds and the discursive distance existing in the current legal conditions. 

Artificial intelligence is a system which could act similar to human intelligent behaviour, comprehend complex situations, simulate thinking process, gain science, have argument of solving problem and at least make a new product. Sometimes human use this system for making her patent. sometimes it, independently makes a patent; a patent which if created by an human, supported in patent law. The problem is that, if artificial intelligence play a rol in creating a patent, as an instrument or independently, is it supportable or not? If yes, who is the rightholder? In this paper, we accede to in expressing – analytical approach, user of artificial intelligence is the rightholder at first assumption. But in second, the ownership is for public.

The terms "guarantor" and "guarantee" are among the words that have different meanings in different fields of law. In civil law, the guarantor is obliged to summon the guarantor. In administrative law, the guarantor means a superior government official, who is unable to perform his duties for a valid reason. in welfare regulations; The meaning of sponsorship is that a person is responsible for the maintenance, guardianship or payment of another person's living expenses. In this research, which was carried out using a descriptive-analytical method; The articles of the direct taxes law where the term "under the responsibility" is used have been studied. While the mentioned interpretation is vague, it is also subject to investigation from other dimensions. In Note (1) of Article (53) of the Civil Code, it is not clear who can be "under takaful". Article 137 also does not specify the criteria and rules for suretyship, and it is not clear in what way a person is "under the responsibility" of another person. In this article, the priority of giving to vertical relatives has not been considered.

The last stage of the judicial process is the formation of an argument of the syllogism of formal logic consisting of premise and conclusion. In this process, syllogism from the point of view of logic is a statement composed of propositions, which, if assumed to be definite and certain, inherently another theorem emerges from it. The use of syllogism of formal logic as the main method of reasoning in judicial ruling process has always been followed by many criticisms, the most important of which is the refusal to fulfill the description of the certainty of the premises and, consequently, the failure to issue inviolable conclusions because of the interference of human factors with emotions and emotions, and also, the impossibility of discovering the certain facts of the case, which are in conflict with the known features of this type of argument. But these objections in general must be answered as follows: First, what is to be expected from the certain preconditions for the formation of a reasoning argument in jurisprudence is the acquired knowledge which is considered acceptable and sufficient in convincing the judge; Not logical or philosophical certainty. Secondly, deduction in its fourteen sources can be divided into two practical applications of argument and controversy. In argument, the substance of "Conjectures" comes from certainty and will be used in the minor premise as the source of the judge's legal syllogism. And in the controversy (debate), he introduces the material of "Famous subjects and Certainties" with special and significant conditions, as the basis of the judge's knowledge, which provides the means to eliminate the said objections in appropriate ways.

In the Iranian legal system, based on the principle of privacy and general rules of responsibility, the principle is that online platforms are not responsible for the actions of their users. Obviously, all instances of loss due to the actions of users through platforms are subject to the rule of liability on the premise of the community of steward and cause, and the application of this rule imposes responsibility on the steward (user) unless the cause (platform) is strong. The criterion of an optimal legal system in the field of civil liability of platforms is the criterion that strikes a balance between the two interests of freedom of expression and the restriction of illegitimate content on online platforms. In Iran, obliging platform managers to review and select content for uploading will reduce content production due to managers escaping criminal liability risk. Also, in some cases, recognizing the legitimacy or illegitimacy of some instances of users' actions is complicated. Therefore, in cases of civil liability, by developing the concept of robustness of cause, where the platform intentionally commits a serious offense, it should be held accountable, and in the case of criminal liability, such liability should be exercised if the platform is malicious.

In order to analyze and distinguish the legal nature, jurists have divided legal events into legal actions and events. The criterion of will as the basis of exclusive division has caused any legal nature of it to be under the headings of event, contract or agreement; In the meantime, some have not considered this division as comprehensive of all natures, and have forged a third clause as a part of contract and agreement, as a purgatory between the two, and some as a third nature. The weakness of the principles and many ambiguities of this approach along with the shortcomings of the first division have caused some, regardless of the existing divisions, while commenting on a legal nature such as forgery, to express that forgery can be both a contractual and a contractual application; Without questioning whether this capability is specific to a particular legal nature or whether it is possible to extend it? Nor is it addressed how a legal act can have different contractual and contractual instances? Finally, we will be faced with an approach that recognizes the existence of a verbal commonality between different instances. In this article, what has been achieved is that for a legal action, contractual and contractual examples can be considered. Such a theory requires a correct interpretation of the legal practice in order to be able to consider it as a possibility that can contain distinct examples and can be proposed as a general theory.