F. Asghari Aghmashhadi; M. Abbasi Golmaei
Abstract
Abstract
According to article 546 of Civil law, a sleeping partnership is a kind of contract in which one of the contracting parties gives over the asset which the other party
employs in commerce therefore the two parties share the outcome profit. The main elements of the sleeping partnership are asset, ...
Read More
Abstract
According to article 546 of Civil law, a sleeping partnership is a kind of contract in which one of the contracting parties gives over the asset which the other party
employs in commerce therefore the two parties share the outcome profit. The main elements of the sleeping partnership are asset, employing the asset in the commerce, and sharing the profit. The legal and juridical sources declare that the asset should be corporeal, money cash, specified and definite. By
reviewing the documents regarding the mentioned conditions, this paper refers to the asset being specified and definite as a necessary condition. However, according to the law and jurisprudence, the asset need not be corporeal, and as stated by the jurisprudence, it doesnât have to be money cash. The
money cash includes both the country currency and foreign money.
B. Hajiazizi; Gh. Niazi; R. Hassankhani
Abstract
Abstract
The incompetent, also called immature, is someone
whose occupying in his own possessions is not rational,
whether he has not accomplished maturity after adolescence
or has faced prodigality after maturity and adolescence. The
incompetent is among the interdicted people, but the question
is ...
Read More
Abstract
The incompetent, also called immature, is someone
whose occupying in his own possessions is not rational,
whether he has not accomplished maturity after adolescence
or has faced prodigality after maturity and adolescence. The
incompetent is among the interdicted people, but the question
is that just occuring the prodigality results in the
incompetentâs interdiction and the elimination of the
prodigality leads to the cancellation of the interdiction, or the
constancy and cessation of interdiction needs the judgeâs
sentence. The jurists have many different ideas about this
matter. Some believe that interdiction gets confirmed as soon
as prodigality occurs and eliminates as it obviates they also
claim that there is no need to judgeâs sentence. Others believe
that whether confirmation or elimination of interdiction is
based on the judgeâs sentence. There are also some who
believe that the judgeâs sentence is not necessary in the
confirmation of interdiction but essential to eliminate it.
Another group believes that just further confirmation of
interdiction and not its elimination needs the judgeâs sentence.
Finally, there is a group of jurists who believe that the
interdiction due to failing to accomplish maturity and facing
prodigality after maturity are different. They believe that in
the first case, judgeâs sentence is not needed whether to
confirm or eliminate interdiction, but it should be present for
both actions in the latter.
]. GalinMoghaddam; S. Yamrali
Abstract
Abstract
In Iran civil law and other statutes, there are no clear
texts about pre-contract liability. In the case of requirement in
jurisprudence, common rights and international goodsâ
convention (Vienna 1980), it is stated that, revoking offer
does not cause any obligation, unless the preservation ...
Read More
Abstract
In Iran civil law and other statutes, there are no clear
texts about pre-contract liability. In the case of requirement in
jurisprudence, common rights and international goodsâ
convention (Vienna 1980), it is stated that, revoking offer
does not cause any obligation, unless the preservation of the
offer is, whether explicitly or implicitly, imperative. About the
preliminary agreement, it should be mentioned that, in the
case that one of the two parties of the agreement revoke the
offer, according to the common civil responsibility law he or
she is responsible. In fact, after the crime being proved,
causality relation and the damage sustained to the other party@,
prejudicial is responsible, although the final contract has not
been made. Therefore, individualsâ liberty in revoking offer
and preliminary agreement does not mean their responsibility
obviation to compensate for the harm, and in case of having
the conditions for making that person responsible, it is
possible to do so.
A. Momeni; Hamid Masjedsaraie
Abstract
Abstract In the Islamic legal system, denying a commandment or a legal capacity and also some of the legal commandments conform to principles, and principles are indeed the basis of many decrees. Although the application of the principles is as spread as the jurisprudence, and they are used in all of ...
Read More
Abstract In the Islamic legal system, denying a commandment or a legal capacity and also some of the legal commandments conform to principles, and principles are indeed the basis of many decrees. Although the application of the principles is as spread as the jurisprudence, and they are used in all of its fields, there is not a specific clarification and a certain concept or definition for them. In fact, there are lots of meanings specified for them, while there is not a criterion to prefer one over another therefore, there is a pervasive uncertainty in the concept of principles in every legal school and juridical religion in Islam. Based on the specifications of the principles, those which are the life initial regulations are separated from the ones that are the intendments of the legal evidence and it is stated that the Islamic jurisprudence is based on the principles which are the life main regulations, therefore the main regulation is that there is no legal capacity, and according to the principle, adhering to legal capacity in judicial point of view must be denied and also the desirable freedom which is humans primary right should be provided moreover there are some tolerances with respect to referral to principles, so some of the principles are not really life main and rational regulations. Besides outlining these tolerances, this paper suggests that the principles which are the necessities of life natural system are different from the ones that are theoretical and whimsical.
M. moloudi; M. hamze howeyda
Abstract
Abstract
With respect to the probative method, implied
confession is different from explicit confession. To prove
explicit confession, direct method is applied, and the
intendment of the confession is exactly the one conforming
with the confessorâs statement, while an indirect method is
applied ...
Read More
Abstract
With respect to the probative method, implied
confession is different from explicit confession. To prove
explicit confession, direct method is applied, and the
intendment of the confession is exactly the one conforming
with the confessorâs statement, while an indirect method is
applied to prove implied confession and the confession is the
intendment which is required for the confessorâs words and
manners. So the implied confession is among the indirect
proofs, beside ostensive definition considering this similarity,
the question is that whether the implied confession has the
nature and the effects of the judicial presumptions or this
matter has no effect on its being considered as a confession in
regard to nature and effects. The results of research indicate
that although there is a similarity between the proving method
of implied confession and judicial presumption, the implied
confession is of equal probative and effect credibility and
ability except in the exclusive cases, as the explicit
confession, and indeed is beyond judicial presumption.
A. Naghibi; B. Khosravinia
Abstract
Abstract
One of the conditions of testament is the testatorâs
possession on the property he is going to will. This condition
has been specified in both judicial references and the civil
law. The substantial point is that what are the consequences of
the absence of this condition and whether ...
Read More
Abstract
One of the conditions of testament is the testatorâs
possession on the property he is going to will. This condition
has been specified in both judicial references and the civil
law. The substantial point is that what are the consequences of
the absence of this condition and whether the will one makes
on otherâs property is inoperative or should be interpreted as
invalid.
There are a group of jurisconsults and legal experts who
believe that such a testament is absolutely invalid however,
juridical references show that there are no credible text
agreeing with this idea, and there is no reason for this
command to be putative between precursors. However, most
of the recent jurisconsults believe that such a testament is
valid in the case of the ownerâs execution, based on the
generalities related to the leniency and donation of the
testament, unauthorized transactions, and permissible
principle.
In this paper, through criticizing and analyzing law
expertsâ viewpoints about the article 841 of the civil law and
examining jurisconsultsâ different opinions, it has been proved
that the testament on otherâs property is inoperative like other
unauthorized transactions and there is no reason to except and
thus interpret it as invalid.
