Family Law
mohsen safari; Zahra Mashayekhi
Abstract
The family is a social institution and a natural unit that we have witnessed significant changes in its definition, structure and function in recent decades. In many legal systems, the family is an ideological institution whose laws are enacted in the light of religious rulings; Laws that are typically ...
Read More
The family is a social institution and a natural unit that we have witnessed significant changes in its definition, structure and function in recent decades. In many legal systems, the family is an ideological institution whose laws are enacted in the light of religious rulings; Laws that are typically authoritarian and the will of individuals to determine their relationships is limited and partial. However, because of the dominance of such rules, one should not ignore the individual areas of human life in the institution of the family and prescribe the violation of their most fundamental rights and freedoms. Fundamentalism is a phenomenon that seeks to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals in society at the judicial level, and the fundamentalization of family rights seeks to amend strict laws whose absolute application will result in nothing but crisis and turmoil in the family institution. It also violates the fundamental rights and freedoms of family members, indiscriminately and extensively. In this research, in a descriptive-analytical method, by reviewing and criticizing the views of proponents and opponents of constitutionalization of family rights and by presenting criteria in line with the Iranian legal system, we have designed and explained the theory of conditional constitutionality. Prevent the fundamental rights of family members and the fundamental values of the family institution, and shine a light on the minds and consciences of our intellectual judges.
Private Law
Ghasem Mohammadi; Gholamali Seyfi; Mehdi Karimian ravandi
Abstract
In principle, the effectiveness of conciliation provisions depends on a set of factors other than the will of the parties, such as the will of the legislator and the role of the judge. According to Article 10 of the Civil Code, the parties have full freedom of agreement, but this freedom is not absolute, ...
Read More
In principle, the effectiveness of conciliation provisions depends on a set of factors other than the will of the parties, such as the will of the legislator and the role of the judge. According to Article 10 of the Civil Code, the parties have full freedom of agreement, but this freedom is not absolute, and the supposed legal plans will change the structure of the contract.Now the question arises to what extent the legislator can play a role in the development and restriction of contractual freedom, given the economic, social, welfare and development needs by benefiting from special laws? And to what extent do law, custom and sharia prefer the public interest in preferring the necessities and pursuing public interests arising from the conflict of personal and public interest?To explain this important point in this article, coercion in the contracting board is divided into two types of elementary and structural coercion, and these results obtained by induction in the opinions of courts, scientific sources and judicial procedures indicate that: First, the courts force the parties to deviate from the conciliation results to a minimum or maximum, and the public interest is emphasized in the issuance of judgments as well as in judicial procedures. Secondly, the cases mentioned in the paragraphs of Article 190 of the Civil Code imply the obligation of elements to the extent that in the dominant aspect, in all agreements, they are present as a necessity in the composition and are irrevocable, but on the contrary, due to the structure of contracts. Certain special parties are required to comply with the rules arising from the requirements and restrictions that have arisen in the context of coercion arising from the elements and will require them to make the desired changes to elements of the contract.
Ali Bahadori; Esmaeil Ajorlo
Abstract
The structure of the judicial system in contemporary Islamic countries is based on the modern models of the world. But, to fulfill the requirements of the Islamic laws, it has been affected by Islamic sharia. The basic issue is that do these legal systems have native models in combining these two approaches ...
Read More
The structure of the judicial system in contemporary Islamic countries is based on the modern models of the world. But, to fulfill the requirements of the Islamic laws, it has been affected by Islamic sharia. The basic issue is that do these legal systems have native models in combining these two approaches or not. What are these models and their pros and cons. This paper is about to analyze these models and their religious or non-religious characteristics. Overall, there are two models of proceedings system based on sharia. First, creating special courts of sharia, and second, trial in general courts, but according to the Islamic laws. The type of political system and its approach in relation to the religion is an important factor in applying these two models. Finally, both models are considered in relation to the realization of sharia laws, which is the ultimate purpose of these models.