نشریه مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی معاصر
پیاپی 32 (پاییز 1402)

The attribution right of the authors of literary and artistic works, as one of the types of moral rights, consists of positive and negative aspects. Because of these aspects, the author should be introduced as the creator of the work and the false attribution of the work to a third person should be prevented. Given the protection of this right in the law of Iran, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, the present study attempts to examine the concept, aspects and scope of the right of attribution in these legal systems in a descriptive-analytical and comparative method. The results of this study indicate that although there are differences arising from the different legal structures and ideas of these legal systems, the creators of literary, artistic, dramatic and musical works can protect their name and identity. Of course, the duration of this right is not the same and contrary to Iranian law, in the United Kingdom and the United States of America, the protection of the author’s name is temporary.

The necessity of supporting the financial convicts in compensation for the negative effects of the imprisonment has created a suitable environment for profiteers and problems for the judicial system. Easy escape from the obligation by the debtor with proof of indigence and debt installment, available proofs of claim for the financial convicts in order to guilefully proof of indigence, excellence default proceeding over contradictory proceeding and frivolous actions (jactitation) like tierce opposition to executive operations or distress only with trigger to delay in the executive operations are problems of the judiciary in execution of judgments. According to the author, confrontation with abuse of rights in process and judicial management is the most important way to solve the prorogation in the execution of judgment. The execution of judgments of mighty judge should reduce judicial mistakes in process and present judicial services in the reasonable period of time at the lowest cost. Legislator should also make useful rules to prevent  abuse of process and smooth the way for quick and low- costs execution of judgment route

Globalization led to the removal of borders, and as a result, new forms of crime came to the fore; furthermore, new tools to deal with it were also established in legal systems. Among these institutions, which are often used to deal with transnational organized crimes, is extended civil confiscation. The extended civil confiscation system of England and Ireland are among the leading legal systems in this field. In Iran's legal system, the "law on dealing with the property of ministers and employees approved in 1337", the "law on amending the anti-money laundering law approved in 1397" and the "law on adding articles to the law on the implementation of the forty-ninth principle (49) approved in 1399" are the closest system in Iran's legal system. Confiscation by the extended civil confiscation system is considerable. In this study, for the purpose of optimization of the legal system governing the confiscation of property related to crime in the Republic of Iran, with a comparative view, the components of the extended civil confiscation system in the legal systems of England and Ireland are described, and based on the resulting approach, effective suggestions for the purpose of reforming the laws governing the property related to crime are offered.  In the comparative approach, "criminal behavior", "reduction of the value of evidence" and "revolutionary revolution" are considered three components of extended civil confiscation. Ambiguity in the "Equality of Arms Standard" in the issue of the method of proof, ambiguity in "Reduction of Probative Evidence" and lack of "Necessary Provisional Agreements" to optimize the implementation of extended civil confiscation can be counted among the damages of the legal system governing extended civil confiscation in Iran's legal system. It should be noted that this research was conducted with a descriptive-analytical method and uses the library method in collecting sources.

Amendment of claim in application before issuance of the patent is considered accepted in most legal systems of the world. What is being challenged is allowance of the amendment of the claims in the application after the issuance of the patent. The Iranian legislature has limited the possibility of amendment before the issuance of the patent, and his silence regarding the possibility of amendment after the issuance of the patents indicates on impermissibility of them. American and British judicial proceedings insist on the permission of amendments even after the issuance of the patent. The European Patent Convention (EPC) is an important regional document that allows these amendments in terms of legal conditions despite the enumeration of the competitive risks of allowing amendments on the one hand and requirements of balance between rights of inventors and the standards of competition right and antitrust norms on the other hand. Our research is primarily library-based. The authors are trying to draw the legislator's attention to the benefits of the permission of the amendments even after issuance of the patent. And they are also trying to mention the rules governing the limitations of the amendments in the light of discussed jurisdictions

The head of state - the country, the highest political and administrative authority in all countries, including the three countries under study (Islamic Republic of Iran, the United States of America and the French Republic) is considered in this article. Since for any official (such as the head of state - country) there may be causes such as death, dismissal or resignation, etc. so that the responsible person cannot perform his duties, in the science of public law a tool called "administrative sponso rship", it is envisaged that in case of administrative sponsorship in order not to leave the position of the responsible person, this tool can be used to fill his position. Thus, the laws of different countries provide for such temporary successors to various political officials, including the head of state. In this article, in a descriptive-analytical manner, we examine the commonalities and differe nces between the causes, the officials elected for tenure, and the limitations of the term of office of the head of state-government in the three countries of Iran, the United States and France, and examine them. The finding of the present article is that there are many problems and shortcomings such as lack of reference for recognizing the temporary incapacity of the Supreme Leader, council leadership sponsorship, lack of specific time limits during the leadership sponsorship and political restrictions for the leadership sponsorship in the administrative sponsorship system. There is a head of state-government in Iran who should be amended or removed by reviewing the Iranian constitution.

It is common in commercial contracts to contain the prohibition clause on assignment. Regarding the condition of prohibition on assignment of contractual rights in English law, two views have been developed. “The Property view” and “the Contract view”. The Property view gives primacy to the freedom of the parties to fashion the rights they bring into existence, so if they wish, they can extinguish the inherent transferability of this right. So, if an assignment happens, it will have no legal effect and will be void. But according to the contract view, prohibition on assignment merely operates at the level of contract and does not characterize contractual rights because parties cannot use contract to modify those attributes of contractual rights that the law of property gives to them. One of those attributes is that they are transferable. So according to contract view, a no-assignment clause doesn’t void the assignment, but operates as a matter of contract, conditioning the duty to perform so the obligation of the obligor to perform is executed only against his contracting party (assignor). In this view, in case of an assignment, the assignee will never have a direct legal relationship with the obligor. In Iranian law, there are three opinions about the prohibition clause; ineffective, void and Invalid against the obligor. “Void” seems to be compatible with the property view and “invalidity against obligor” is compatible with the contractual view in English law. Finally, due to the flaws expressed in the contractual view, we will come to the conclusion that the property view is more consistent with the prevailing legal rules, the real intention of the parties and the custom of the merchants.

In today’s world, it would certainly be difficult to do without services of electronic systems. Making use of these apparently free services will come at the cost of complying with terms and conditions which have already been drafted by authors of the mentioned systems as a result of a great deal of effort and possibly in consultation with lawyers. Accordingly, in case users were aware of the mentioned terms, they either have never used them, or at least would have been reluctant to do so. On that account, the present article seeks to deal with the query as to the ideal way to deal with the imposition of unfair terms and ways to minimize its disadvantages while enjoying benefits of these terms. We advocate the thesis that a composite approach, which curbs and restricts these terms in the most efficient way possible, is the ideal way to protect rights of users as the weaker party. Therefore, in the present article, using comparative and analytical-library method, we shall examine, in three sections, methods of conclusion and contents of these terms and the proposed ways of dealing with them.

In US and European Union law on contractual obligations, there is a theory called depecage. According to this theory, the parties can rule the law of more than one country while dividing the contract into different parts. There are several definitions of this theory in the writings of American and European jurists. There are questions like these: What is the exact meaning of this theory? What is the evidence for this theory in contractual obligations under US and EU law? Given that selecting the law governing the contract and the application of depecage by the parties is an agreement, what law and legal system governs the validity of the will of the parties, their competence and the form of this agreement? The present article seeks to provide a precise concept of this theory, to determine the scope of application of this theory in US and EU law in contractual obligations, and to specify the rules that the parties must follow in applying this theory in order to open a window in front of the legislator in Iranian law to approve the rule of resolving the conflict with the needs of international trade law in the field of the law governing contracts

According to Clause 4, Article 51 of the Civil Procedure Code, one of the obligatory provisions of a claim is the commitments and grounds by virtue of which the plaintiff is entitled to the claim. In some of the mentioned articles of law, such as Articles 15 and 98, the origin, and the cause of the claim are also referred to. In civil procedural law, the origin, grounds, the cause and the mode of the claim have not been properly explained; hence, by studying legal sources, one can find out that some jurists have considered the origin and mode of the claim as the same, and others have coined the ground of the claim and sometimes equated it with the origin of the claim. Distinguishing the difference, and at the same time, the relationship between them, has important effects on the litigation. For example, it can be determined which one is obligatory to mention in the claim since the failure to specify it will cause the suspension of the claim and the issuance of a notice to remedy the defect. Furthermore, changing the origin of the claim after filing the claim is not possible, but changing the mode of the claim is possible when the conditions stipulated in Article 98 of the Civil Procedure Code are observed. The legislator’s flaw is to mention some words without stating their meaning, for every word or phrase in the civil procedural law has its own specific legal effects. In this research, the obligations and grounds, as well as the origin, the coined word 'cause', and also the mode of the claim are explained in simple and clear language.

Judicial supervision of the Administrative Justice Court on government regulations in the field of administrative offenses is considered as the important executive guaranty to ensure the rule of law and the prevention of the loss of rights of the accused employees. The findings of the present research, in response to the question related to the causes and Indicators of annulment of government regulations in the field of administrative offenses, using library and documentary sources and descriptive and analytical methods, show that the Administrative Justice Court, in the judicial review of government regulations, considers their contradiction with the law and incompetence or going beyond the scope of authority as the reasons for invalidation.Thus, in the nullifier rulings of the General Assembly of the Administrative Justice Court in this area, approval of any mandatory rule, determining the authority and criteria for dealing with administrative offenses, detection of offenses and determination of administrative penalties and prescription of prosec ution and investigation are considered as indicators of contradiction with the law. Incompetence or going beyond the scope of authority and the monopoly of the legislator and the document of annulment of government regulations have been placed in the field of the administrative offenses of employees.