نشریه حقوق تطبیقی (نامه مفید)
پیاپی 1 (بهار و تابستان 1393)

Multimedia works are conceived as the newest technological products in recent decades and because of their high innovation and resourcefulness, they have had the ability to capture international markets in a short time. Such works that stem from intellectual efforts of human being is certainly protected by intellectual property law, however the main issue is to determine a legal regime for the protection of these works. Adopting a comparative approach, this article is to firstly specify the legal and technical nature of such new works and the factors caused them to be separated from other existing intellectual works and secondly to investigate the process of protecting multimedia works to be finally discerned whether or not there is the possibility to protect multimedia works based on current intellectual property laws in different countries.

By analyzing issues in the private international law of contracts from a comparative perspective, the convergence of two legal systems, Romano-Germanic and Common Law, in adhering to party autonomy for determining the applicable law, will be clarified. Although, party autonomy has emerged as a dominant principle in private international law of both legal systems, neither grants unlimited party autonomy and a number of restrictions on the freedom of choice are in place. Both common and civil law restrict choice-of-law clauses when it comes to certain contracts. These restrictions usually refer to contracts in which one party is perceived to be in weaker position, most importantly consumer contracts, employment contracts, and insurance contracts. So, in these kinds of contracts the priority of protective laws over the freedom of choice is necessary to avoid inequality of transaction power of the parties.

It has been over a century since the first flight by an airplane and ever since, civil aircraft have been recognized as vehicles whose most outstanding feature has been their speed giving them a key position in transportation industry. Aviation industry, therefore, plays a crucial role in economic development in the world. This has caused many states and international bodies to be concerned about providing and preserving safety and security of the flights. This concern has been allayed by some domestic laws and regulations as well as over 23 international conventions and protocols. The law of “punishment for violating safety of aircraft and sabotaging the equipments and facilities of aircraft” passed in Iran in 1970 has defined and criminalized many offenses in spite of its brevity. The provisions of the abovementioned act are still applicable and have been a reliable source for judges and lawyers. Comparing this act with international laws, despite some similarities in between, there are some differences and gaps as well. Although some of these gaps have been bridged in the following years by such laws as “punishment for violators of industry” passed in 1974 and “Islamic Penal Code” in 1996, it is still necessary to gather the scattered acts regarding the subject matter of flight safety and security and recodify them considering current needs and requirements of offences and punishments.

The jurists believe that the reparation of vehicle accident damages by insurer is based on contract. They analyze the insurer’s liability on this foundation. But this approach faces some difficulties and contradictions. In our opinion, at least compulsory liability insurance is not founded on contract, but on loss distribution. The contract is only an instrument for collecting the necessary capital for reparation. Resolving problems on this basis becomes easy, and it would make it convenient to understand the law and facilitates its implementation. This liability may be better organized under the term of “Collective Civil Liability System”. This idea avoids irresolvable difficulties. This paper tries to explain the two foundations and set forth their effects on important problems, and to compare its outcome with English Law, and then report the result.

The most important question in connection with future goods (Istisna’), the passing of property, will be dealt. When dose the passing of title take place: the time the contract is made or goods is manufactured or the manufactured goods is delivered? Undoubtedly, identifying the nature of Istisna’ contract has direct impact on the passing of property.The dominant tendency in Iranian law is that the Istisna’ is a sale contract, and some of the jurists say that it is an enterprise contract. The Pre-sell Building Act (2010) has not clarified the issue. The Afghan Civil Code has expressly provided that Istisna’ is an enterprise contract which is taken from Egypt Civil Code.In this article, our aim is to study the time of passing of the title by examining both of the above mentioned assumptions, and also to explain the exact nature of Istisna’. Our idea is that the Istisna's nature is a combination of sale and employment contracts. That means, Istisna’ is an independent contract; not just a sale contract or an employment contract.

In respect of justification of tortious acts (faits justicatifs) of the lawful superior and the subordinate, there are specific provisions or regulations and principles of civil liability in various countries. However, in order to justify the tortious act of the lawful superior and the subordinate, there must exist four conditions:“public official”, “competent legal authority”, “legal order” and “compliance with the prudence”. One of the fundamental issues in different legal systems is the test and standard of liability of the official in executing unlawful order. That is, a standard which determines in what cases of the execution of the order, the subordinate would be liable and in what cases the lawful superior. In some countries, for example France, the court will examine whether in the circumstances of the particular official, a reasonable and prudent official would have obeyed the unlawful order or not. In case of obedience in such circumstances, the official would not be responsible. But, in other countries, such as Egypt, Syria and Iraq, the subordinate must generally compensate damages caused to others unless he/she believes the order is unlawful and he/she exercises prudence in executing the order. As to Iranian law, one can say that the test and standard of liability of the official in executing unlawful orders is behavior as a conscientious official with precaution as expected from a reasonable and prudent one. The authors attempt to study the scope and conditions of justification of the tortious act of lawful superior and official in a comparative manner.

One of the aspects of legal protection of literary and artistic works is the legal remedies available to the right-holder. The variety of moral and economic rights of the author may have an impact of civil remedies. However, some remedies are common for the infringement of both moral and economic rights such as the issuance of interim order to prevent the continued violation of the right, restitution and the community-based remedies. The most important difference in the moral rights between Common Law and Iranian Law, in terms of the remedies, is the monetary offset. According to Iranian Law, due to non–financial nature of these rights, monetary compensation is not available. However it is important how to assess damages for monetary compensation in the case of economic rights violation.There are three criteria: reasonable royalty, lost profits and account of profits that each of them can be used in special cases.

Existence of a complete and accurate system for review and control is one of the important and critical elements in a safe and effective management. One of the most important forms of review is judicial review of the actions of administrative agencies that have been evolved and developed on the basis of rule of law, duty of public officials and institutions to accountability and the establishment of democracy in recent decades. Regulatory models in some legal systems of the European Union have been distinguished depending on being defined on the basis of structure or jurisdiction. In line with the ultimate goal of the EU members to integrate their laws and regulations, the glimmer of hope in creating a common and uniform model in the area of judicial review of the acts of administrative agencies is taking shape. In the Iranian legal system, following some leading countries in this context such as France and Germany, judicial institutions are established by legislature each of them having their own functions. In this study, it has been tried to consider the basis and appraisement of judicial review models in some countries of the European Union and Iranian legal system and also to compare their similarities and differences.