عنوان مقاله [English]
The facts would be considered as a set of legal and material events which are presented by each of the parties to a dispute for justifying and reinforcing their object of action. These parties try to prove this set. Some of the important issues of hearing include possibility or impossibility of the facts in all of the hearing steps and the way of facts effect on the hearing result.These issues cause some ambiguities for the correct civil hearing in terms of silence of civil procedure code. This article aims to answer all of these ambiguities. According to studying different views of jurists and judicial precedent, we can understand that presenting facts and expressing the is obligatedby the parties to a dispute: gradually passive vole of the courts was adjusted by the amendment of laws and the importance of judge’s role beside parties to a dispute was emphasized in justice achievement. Presenting and proving facts are possible in each step of court of first instance and provincial court of appeal and they are different from presentation of new allegation. The court cannot render meritorious judgment in favor of a plaintiff without presenting enough qualified facts in order to justify the enforcement of the legal rule. If court of appeal distinguishes the facts in a different way, then it will annul the reviewed judgment and will render a new judgment. After the conclusiveness of judgment, during the revision, if Supreme Court discovers that the presented facts are not sufficient for justifying invoked legal rule, then it will break the reviewed judgment due to the lack of a legal base. In addition, the facts have a direct effect on clarification and explication of judgment and distinguishing authority of res judicata.