مجله حقوقی دادگستری
پیاپی 74 (تابستان 1390)

Sometimes people establish Commercial companies to pursue their fraudulent purposes under the veil of legal personality of the company. The law of Iran has not predicted a solution for this legal dilemma. In other legal systems such as English legal system, the courts confront these kinds of fraudulent acts under the famous doctrine of “Piercing the Corporate Veil” by authorizing the creditor of the company which assets are not sufficient to compensate the credit, to withdraw the limited liability rule and recover its respective claims from the assets and property of the fraudulent partner)s). In this research, we try to investigate and recognize this concept in the Law of Iran. The result of this research shows that within the English legal system, fraudulous use of the commercial company form will undoubtedly entail to the withdrawal of the corporate veil and unlimited liability of the fraudulent partner(s); however, some matters such as the legal sanctions, and also the concept of unfair actions, are still under dispute. As a result of this research it is also indicated that in our domestic legal system relying upon the doctrine of “fraud” it is possible to impede the validity of fraudulent acts of partner(s) and exceptionally rule on the unlimited liability of these people towards the company creditors.

Local Content Requirement is an obligation that guest countries impose it on foreign investors to use a certain proportion of locally made parts or components. This requirement affects trade and restricts or distorts it, so according to WTO regulations is inconsistent with non-discrimination principle and WTO members obliged to avoid from imposing local content on other member’s investors because the local content requirement distorts free trade and discriminate between local and imported goods.Local content requirement also applies in many Iranian regulations and is one the major requirements impose on foreign investors. This essay study local content requirement in Iranian Regulations and compare it with WTO Agreements especially TRIMs Agreements.

The abandoned law is a law which is not come into force in courts and other executive bodies, regarding the capability and possibility of the enforcement. Hence, the law abandoning criteria is failure in executing the same by official authorities and law enforcement bodies. Therefore, we should separate such concept from the similar ones. Occasionally, the legislator shall temporarily cease the enforcement of a certain law for any reason. Such law is not obsolete, but also the execution thereof has remained as suspended. Also, a law may not be enforced for not having any subject and credit and its execution is suspended. If a law is disobeyed by the people, it shall not be obsolete, provided that the courts shall not forbear from applying the law in respect of the offenders. Because, the law violating behaviors which, from time to time, prevail in the society do not have the customary cause in real concept. In other words, the prevalence of public violation from a law shall not cause to remain it obsolete, although the dignity of the law is diminished. If the ordinary people makes indifferent to the law, the breach of law is achieved not its abandoning. Notwithstanding, the law abandoning, contrary to its abrogation, shall not cause to invalidate the law, because only the legislator can abrogate or annul the law, as he makes or enacts a law.

Accidents resulting from driving and motor vehicle’s incumbency are considered as the most prevalent accidents during the last years. In Iran, its statistics is more than standard limit, too. Recently, a law was enacted in Iran and it caused the civil liability system and the remedy of losing party in such accidents are developed. This also affects on compensation insurance system. Herein, we want to answer this question whether these developments were transformed the liability basis and sent it away from the jurisprudence guarantee topics, or no change was made in these fundamentals. Consequently, the theory of “unlimited compensation of the losing party”, subject of article 26 of Accidents Vetting Act, is not consistent with Iranian legal system. In fact, with due regard to the theory of “Religious Jurisprudence Relation”, we can achieve a reasonable interpretation.

In legal systems, regarding the expected objectives, the various factors have been taken into account in determination of basis of civil liability in order to select a more appropriate rule. The liability may depend upon the commitment of negligence by tortfeasor or only the existence of the causation between the detrimental act and loss shall be enough for achievement of the liability. The present article, irrespective of basis accepted in legal systems, intends to study the effect of these rules on behavior of people and their encouragement in observing the precaution. In cases where the tortfeasor can hinder to occur the loss, the rule of strict liability may have the appropriate effect and encourage him in observing the precaution. But, if the precaution of tortfeasor and victim is necessary for prevention of occurring loss, the more appropriate effects shall be followed through applying the negligence or competitive strict liability. Such analysis makes it possible to consider the probable effects of rule on the behavior of the people and to be more appropriate or inappropriate, before constituting the rule and while taking into account the various aspects, and to take the proper actions for removal of its effects.

The unique nature of the internet and contracts concluded in virtual space have the remarkable effects in many of traditional principles and concepts of courts jurisdiction. One of these contracts is the electronic contracts of business to consumer (B2C) in which the consumer is primarily considered as the weaker party of the contract. Hence, it needs a protective mechanism. One of the protective aspects of the consumer is to determine a competent court and to pay attention to “a special procedure in lawsuits of electronic contracts”. By way of determining such court, the presentation of an analysis based on theory of “Activity-Orientation” is the final outcome which is offered to the Iranian legislator as an approach.

The general-partnership company is a type of persons’ company whose credit shall depend upon the credit of its partners. If the creditors of such company can not, due to not sufficing the company’s assets, vindicate their claims from the company, they can have recourse to any of the partners, individually or refer to all of them, jointly. Lack of the company’s assets for payment of the debts is evident after the cessation and accomplishment of the liquidation procedures. Considering that the company’s creditors can not, till the completion of liquidation, have recourse to the partners as well as the company’s bankruptcy is not gone with the partners’ bankruptcy, and regarding that the issuance of the partners’ bankruptcy order during the bankruptcy of the company, is impossible in different reasons. Also, according to the commercial code, the sealing of the partners’ property in return for the company’s debts is prohibited, the guaranteeing partners shall have the enough opportunity in order to discharge their own assets from the creditors’ availability in different methods. Such status with a few differences, is seen in “Trade” bill which has not been finally approved by Islamic Consultative Assembly, yet. Although, the provisions of this bill are not complete, but it keeps better the creditors’ rights of the general-partnership company in comparison with the commercial code.