Esmaeil Haditabar; Maryam Mehri Matankolaei
Abstract
Abortion is known as a crime in numerous legal systems in the world. Criminalization basis is different due to religious, ethical and philosophical points of view and also several lawyers are pro or against criminalization and decriminalization of abortion. Abortion is related to the fetus life from ...
Read More
Abortion is known as a crime in numerous legal systems in the world. Criminalization basis is different due to religious, ethical and philosophical points of view and also several lawyers are pro or against criminalization and decriminalization of abortion. Abortion is related to the fetus life from one hand, and therefore protection of fetus life and its respect is the most important basis of criminalization. On the other hand, supporting mother’s rights and respect her freedom is the reason of decriminalization of abortion. The first group or pro- life lawyers form their debates on the basis of refraining from harm others which is known as “harm principle”. The second group reason concerning free will that is called “liberalism”. Thus, “harm principle” and “free will” are against each other. The main issue of this difference and disagreement is the concept and meaning of the fetus legal personality and the time it begins. Accordingly, if one believes that the fetus does not have legal personality there will be no conflict. Hence, this essay is to investigate “harm principle” and “free will” in criminalization of abortion.
Mehdi Abasi Sarmadi; Seyyed Salman seyedi
Abstract
Non-contractual obligations, along with contractual obligations, form a large part of the legal obligations and, in aspect of conflict of laws, constitute a conflict resolution rule. The conflict of laws and the determination of the law governing non-contractual obligation arise when one or more foreign ...
Read More
Non-contractual obligations, along with contractual obligations, form a large part of the legal obligations and, in aspect of conflict of laws, constitute a conflict resolution rule. The conflict of laws and the determination of the law governing non-contractual obligation arise when one or more foreign elements interfere. The most recent initiative in European legislation on conflicts of laws in non-contractual obligations was passed in 2007 which is known as the Rome II. In these regulations, law of the place of the damage is accepted as the general rule of law applicable to non-contractual obligations. Therefore, the Iranian judge faces a big problem in determining the applicable law, because Iranian legal system has not any rule in regard to the non-contractual obligations. In this case, some believe in the applicability of the law of the place of the incident. The other view is that, because of the lack of an explicit statute, the applicable law is the law of the court seat. In the Iranian law, we believe that the law of the place of the incident can be accepted as the applicable law. As well as this point, we will consider the regulations of the Rome II, as the first international document related to the non-contractual obligations.
