International Law
Saeed haghani
Abstract
Abstract:Personal Status registration Code endows ‘Provincial Security Council’ to decide on the Iranian nationality of those whose nationality is under question. The general assembly of the Iranian Supreme Court, in its binding judgments no 658 and 748, made an end to uncertainties regarding ...
Read More
Abstract:Personal Status registration Code endows ‘Provincial Security Council’ to decide on the Iranian nationality of those whose nationality is under question. The general assembly of the Iranian Supreme Court, in its binding judgments no 658 and 748, made an end to uncertainties regarding judicial review of Provincial Security Councils’ decisions on Iranian nationality. The General assembly finds that the applicant might subject such administrative decisions to judicial review. Nonetheless, there is room to enquire about the competent judicial body to proceed with such judicial review. In the final analysis, I believe that a distinction should be made between cases of requests for Iranian ID and cases in which an already existing Iranian ID is subjected to the annulment process (i.e. suspected holders of Iranian nationality documents). While the Court of Administrative Justice would more appropriately handle the first category, civil courts of the first instance are the competent court to deal with the second category
International Law
Saeed haghani
Abstract
As any other legal discipline, conflict of laws follows a predetermined methodology. Two diverging methodologies have been applied in two sides of Atlantic. European countries follow a two-steps method, according to which the interested parties know or can find out ex ante the law applicable to their ...
Read More
As any other legal discipline, conflict of laws follows a predetermined methodology. Two diverging methodologies have been applied in two sides of Atlantic. European countries follow a two-steps method, according to which the interested parties know or can find out ex ante the law applicable to their regal relation. Au contraire, the fashionable American method of governmental interest analysis does not let the parties know the applicable law unless a dispute is brought before the court in this regard. Iranian legislator since the first days of legislation followed the European a priori style. Nevertheless, the 2020 Draft Commercial Code includes an a posteriori provision on lex contractus. This abrupt paradigm shift would entail some problems not only for the contracting parties and judges, but also in connection with conflict of laws methodology itself. This paper takes archive research method in illustrating competing legal systems’ approaches. Then I focus on Draft Commercial Code with a future studies approach to evaluate the paradigm shift and probable problems caused by this Draft.
International Law
Reza Maghsoudi
Abstract
Abstract: A judgment issued by a foreign country has been recognized and enforced if originating court has jurisdiction for hear the matter. This jurisdiction has been evaluated on the base of rules of addressed country. The key question is what are the criteria for accepting the jurisdiction of a foreign ...
Read More
Abstract: A judgment issued by a foreign country has been recognized and enforced if originating court has jurisdiction for hear the matter. This jurisdiction has been evaluated on the base of rules of addressed country. The key question is what are the criteria for accepting the jurisdiction of a foreign court at the voting stage? Some countries have jurisdiction over a foreign court, such as a domestic court. Others, by limiting the scope of jurisdiction of a foreign court, accept the jurisdiction of a foreign court only on the basis of strict criteria.. In Iranian law, only the exclusive jurisdiction of the Iranian court is considered as an impediment for recognition of foreign judgments. The need to meet the legitimate expectations of private individuals and to provide predictability in cross-border relations requires that the jurisdiction of a foreign court be defined as in the 2019 Hague Convention and that litigants be assured of the condition of recognition in other countries before the trial begins. The lack of uniform jurisdiction rules among countries to recognize foreign court judgments undermines the efficiency and usefulness of international litigation and makes it impossible for free movement of judgments between countries. The need to meet the legitimate expectations of private individuals and to create predictability in cross-border relations requires that cases of jurisdiction of a foreign court be specified and that litigants ensure that this condition is met in other countries before a trial can begin.
International Law
Majid Ghamami; Aliasghar Saneian
Abstract
If an agreement of the choice of court or choice of forum clause in international private law has legal effect, it may grant exclusive jurisdiction to the chosen court, and disqualified from the courts of other countries, unless agreed to be the chosen court is non-exclusive. Judgment of chosen court ...
Read More
If an agreement of the choice of court or choice of forum clause in international private law has legal effect, it may grant exclusive jurisdiction to the chosen court, and disqualified from the courts of other countries, unless agreed to be the chosen court is non-exclusive. Judgment of chosen court in another country shall be recognized or enforced if such agreement is valid under the law of the court of foreign judgment. The method of this article is analytical-descriptive and its result shows that such an agreement is generally neither contrary to public judicial policy nor contrary to the rules of internal civil procedure in determining the jurisdiction of courts, unless the agreement is not valid in terms of law (unlawful), such as the choice of court agreement is the case in the exclusive jurisdiction of another courts of country. Also, if this agreement has been concluded fraudulently or unfairly or by fraud, then it is not valid. Plus, if the chosen court of the two parties is not related to the elements of the dispute, the court can, due to the lack of a reasonable and legitimate interest and to avoid imposing court costs on its respective country, consider such jurisdiction invalid and refuse to hear the case; But if the judgment is issued, recognition and enforcement of it in abroad, depends on the court's opinion of the legitimacy of this type of agreement.
