عضو هیأت علمی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
عنوان مقاله [English]
The purpose of the proceeding and the issuance of judgment is the determination of the legal solution and it's performance between the parties. However sometimes for various reasons, there is no way to perform the judgment. This means that the enforcement of the judgment may be in conflict with the rights of third parties or its subject may be changed or administrative obstacles cause to cease the execution of it. In some cases, the enforcement of judgment also needs to preconditions that it can't be established and implemented without the independent proceeding and with respect to the right of defense. In fact, the principles of due process for example the hearing parties statement, giving the opportunity to defense and the complaint against the court decision must be followed also in the enforcement stage and Hence, sometimes it must be stopped the enforcement of judgment. These cases have not a certain criteria in jurisprudence. One of the its reasons is the lack of supervision of excellent authorities over the executive orders because most decisions in the implementation stage are through administrative orders and the beneficiary can't complain about them. Due to defect in the legal literature (doctrine) and fitful jurisprudence, the effects of unenforceability of judgment exactly are not clear. In fact, the main question is, can it be possible to enforce a definitive judgment? And if the answer is positive, what is the criterion of it? It seems there are exceptions in judicial review to failure for implementing of definitive judgments and seems the most important criterion can be seen in practical problems and changing the subject of judgment. Hence in the present article, these issues will be considered.