فصلنامه مطالعات حقوقی
سال ششم شماره 1 (بهار 1393)

The personality of the plaintiff in the Administrative Court of Justice is one of the questionable subject matters over Administrative Court of Justice that affecting jurisdiction of that court. Since the establishment of the Administrative Court of Justice، there has been a dispute over the question is the plaintiff affective، with regard to its private personality or public personality، in the acceptance of the claims in the court? And may the plaintiff observed، with regard to its private personality، as diagnosis criterion for the actionable claims in the court? This article tries to examine the subject matter from the perspective of law، doctrine and judicial proceeding and to criticize the under consideration theories in doctrine and the approach that accepted by judicial proceeding. It attempts، therefore، to yield a right approach to the subject.

Economic analysis of criminal law applies economic methods and tools to study crimes and responds to them. Estimation of costs of criminal justice، sources and their allocation، are the subject of economic analysis of efficacy of criminal justice programs. The prevention of crime is one of emphasized responses to crime in criminal justice. The criminologists with respect to different crimes، design various programs and offer for implementation in the criminal justice systems. Because of scarcity of sources، policymakers are inevitable to choice the most economic program. The economic analysis of crime prevention program to allow comparison of the outcomes of policy options with comparable costs — is also worth pursuing to allow for selection among a menu of prevention programs، given scarce public and private resources for all things. In the legal system of Iran، principal 156 of the Constitutional Law prescribes prevention of crime through the judiciary. In spite of its importance، the economic analysis of crime prevention has not been considered so much in the legal researches in Iran. This article explains the importance of the economic analysis of crime prevention، cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis models of economic analysis of crime prevention.

In the past، the most common method of commercial dispute resolution was referring to the national courts. But in recent decades، international commercial arbitration to resolve international disputes، among other forms of dispute resolution، is becoming increasingly important. Nowadays، the emergence of new technologies، especially in the global business area، we are watching accelerated communication، so that increased trade and consequently competition on world markets is created the changes in the international trade infrastructure. Currently، the process of globalization demands alternative methods، such as arbitration in cyberspace that is a developed and the modern form of the traditional arbitration. Though the E- Arbitration is the same traditional institution of arbitration and only its application has changed but the only way is to say that the establishment of this new institution raised a variety of legal and technologic issues، including communication tools، methods of information، hearings، issuing and delivery of arbitration award. The results of this research shows that the creation of this new legal institution and its technical developments in the proceedings، create new conflicts that require applying special rules that demands the effort of experts، international procedure and forming the national rules. In this regard، using the experience of some countries and organizations that have experienced this kind of judgment is necessary.

Clarification of the meaning of apostasy and its application is one of the complexities of Islamic jurisprudence. This complication is doubled when «the Islamic state» aims to implement this agenda in «the modern world». Islamic juristconsults have elaborated on inborn apostasy and aquired apostasy mentioning verdicts for each in details. Some contemporary authors have also contributed to the satisfaction of seekers of knowledge about these verdicts، which are not repeated in this article. What is included here is a glance at the background of this concept in the Koran، quotations، and Islamic jurisprudence. It is a study of the concept of apostasy and the implementation of jurisconsult''s about it، and emphasizes the fact that sometimes change of religion is due to factors outside one''s control inevitably effecting change in human intellect and mind. Hence the punishment for apostasy is questionable because of its conceptual ambiguity and the punishment for it should be more discretionary than set.

Breach of contract is of two kinds: fundamental and non fundamental. Fundamental breach not only damages the core of contract but it also deprives the other party of what he is entitled to. Breach of contract can be considered as fundamental when its result is foreseeable for the defaulting party or for a reasonable person in the same circumstance. Such defaults are of great importance in International Commercial Contract law and are mentioned in Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods،1980، Art. 25. Written statements of the above mentioned Art. is so general that makes it difficult to conform with cases. Therefore various interpretations about the concept of Fundamental Breach of Contract go on and on

In Iran and America''s criminal procedure model، in the phases of pretrial investigation about proving sufficient evidence against the accused and sending the case to court different methods are applied. In Iranian model، as one of the models with the interrogator، Officials in charge of the investigation and evidence collection that means the investigator or prosecutor، decision Personally concerning the sufficiency of evidence proving and it is necessary to collect all reasons for sending a case to court. In other words، the criterion of proof «beyond any reasonable doubt» is dominant on this level. yet in America، As one of the models without investigator، this is available to other judicial institutions such as judges and jury. Also in America، Reasonable cause criterion is dominant on the end of pretrial investigation stage. Iranian model is more appropriate than American model Deposit terms of deciding the sufficiency of evidence proving the official Enterprise investigation. Because that will be cause of more focus on the stage of preliminary investigation and Prolongation prevent proceeding and does not conflict with the rights of individuals. But the American model of governance seems more appropriate the Iranian model because apply these criteria leads to shorter stage of preliminary investigation and the trial period will be longer. so culprit will be allowed to defend themselves better.