فهرست مطالب ابراهیم جوانمرد فرخانی

Floating dowry is a type of dowry that is not specified in the text of the contract, but its calculation mechanism is specified. In this case, the parties open the dowry to be appointed according to the custom of the day or the opinion of one of the parties or a third arbitrator. Now the question comes to mind whether a marriage whose dowry is indefinite and floats in time is valid or not? Accordingly, the authors, while analyzing various views, have studied the above-mentioned discussion from the perspective of Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law and have studied it scientifically. The method of this paper is to analyze-description. The research data was collected by using the library. Research findings it shows that concise knowledge is sufficient to remove the ambiguity of the dowry and there is no need for detailed knowledge. Therefore, it is not necessary for the dowry to be specific at the time of marriage, but it is enough to be able to determine it in the future.

The legitimacy of Khul' divorce for the wife is an issue that has a precedent in Islamic jurisprudence and has been accepted in some Muslim jurisdictions based on some circumstances. Accepting this right in Iran law can prevent abuse of the right to divorce and the suspension of marriage. In this research, based on a library effort the possibility and requirements of such a divorce has been examined from a comparative point of view. The findings of the research indicate that the wife's strong hatred form her husband is the base of conferring a thing to him and disobeying from him due to the mental and emotional pressures that applied over her. In this assumption, obligating wife to this marriage despite her inner desire is considered a harm to her. In this regard, we cannot confer the right of divorce to husband as a special right for man so that even in cases which the wife is afraid of falling into sin, which that, leds her to a wandering situation. In such a situation, the law of many Islamic jurisdictions gives the wife a right to divorce without the husband's consent.the law of many Islamic jurisdictions gives the wife a right to divorce without the husband's consent.

Artificial cloud fertilisation technology has recently affected various aspects of human life. This technology affects air, water, and land and has potential implications for economic development, production, and the environment. Cloud fertility technology can have both positive and negative effects on the environment. The application of this technology will increase rainfall, develop required water reserves, reduce drought, and improve human health and well-being. However, silver iodide particles and other substances used in cloud fertilisation may have harmful environmental effects. Based on this, this research was conducted with jurisprudence and legal investigation of the environmental aspects of cloud fertility and with a descriptive-analytical method. The research findings show that the reasons for opposing this technology are not real, and this matter's complications and biological risks are more imaginary and caused by a pessimistic attitude. The extraction of water using cloud fertility technology does not pose environmental risks. Therefore, it is possible to use this technology from a jurisprudential and legal point of view.

There are disagreements between jurists and lawyers regarding the minimum and maximum duration of temporary marriage (Nikah mut'ah, Arabic: نکاح المتعه, Romanized: nikāḥ al-mutʿah, literally temporary marriage or Sigheh, Persian: صیغه، ازدواج موقت). There is no stipulation in the civil law that specifies the duration range of this legal institution. Accordingly, we are going to explain different opinions in this article and choose a view that is based on the rules of civil jurisprudence and legal principles. This research has been collected in a library method. The results show that the minimum duration in temporary marriage is long enough to allow sexual satisfaction and enjoyment. The maximum duration should not be more than the life of the couple or one of them. It can be finally said based on the interpretation of the will of the parties according to their custom and their obligation to observe customary affairs that a marriage which has been concluded for a long time is a permanent marriage (Arabic: النکاح الدائم, Romanized: nikāh ad-Dā'im) all the effects of permanent marriage such as divorce, inheritance, iddah (Arabic: العده, Romanized: al-ʿidda; “period of waiting”), right of sexual intercourse (Arabic: حق القسم, Romanized: qasm, the right to sleep together, and the right to sleep at night during marriage in Islam) and alimony are considered.

In this essay it has been studied that from the point of view of Iranian and Egyptian law and Islamic jurisprudence and with an analytical-descriptive method, on what basis and under what circumstances, arises the breach of the contract creates a right to compensation and the right of termination. In Egyptian law, after breaching an obligation, the oblige is free to keep the contract and receive damages or terminate it, while in Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence, the first right available is the obligation of the obligor to fulfill his obligation. In Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence, the right to terminate an agreement is the result of the failure of specific performance, not a confrontation of obligations or a fundamental breach. It is based on the rules of Tort, not breach of contract. Also, in Egyptian law, contrary to Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence, one of the conditions for claiming damages or terminating a contract is to send a notice to the obligor to fulfill the obligation. Against Article 230 Iranian civil code, regarding on agreement on damages in Egyptian legal system courts have authority to adjust the agreed amount. . . . . . . . . . .

The acceptance of unilateral will as one of the sources of commitments in the comparative jurisprudence and the Iranian law is dubitable. According to the renowned majority of the Imami jurists and the Sunni jurisprudential schools, as well as some lawyers, īqā' (unilateral legal act), like a contract, cannot generally create a commitment, but is a secondary and exceptional source for commitments. However, as an unpopular opinion, īqā' is not limited to the cases foreseen in Shari'a and law, but as a general rule, it can create a commitment against its owner and for the benefit of another. Accordingly, the authors try to examine the jurisprudential and legal foundations of this issue and analyze the opinions regarding it. The data has been collected by library method and then analyzed descriptively and analytically. The results show that, in order for social trust to be established among the members of the society and the legal security of others to remain immune from attack, the expresser of the will must adhere to his commitment and not shy away from this legal commitment.

Tazāḥum in the meaning of "competition of two propositions in practice" does not have a long history in jurisprudence. It does not occur to separate tazāḥum from ta‘āruḍ or conflict resolution, prior to the late jurisprudent Bihbahānī. From a historical perspective the first jurisprudent who has raised this issue was the late Nā’īnī. After him, in the principles of Imāmī jurisprudence, it has been called tazāḥum when two legislations are conflicted in practice and independently discussed. In spite of this separation, it is difficult to diagnose some cases and in many cases the disagreement between jurisprudents is still evident. In this article, which is written in a descriptive and discretionary method, it is expressed that if the statement that comes in the legislature also refers to the authority, it is a conduit of ta‘āruḍ, but if the proposition that comes in the legislative stage does not refer to the practice stage, ta‘āruḍ will not take place. In this regard by historical explanation of the above two terms, ta‘āruḍ and tazāḥum, it has been shown how the "condition of power in duty" and the "possibility or impossibility and acceptance or non-acceptance of tarattub can be the source of these differences.

Imami and Sunni jurists believe in the legitimacy of choosing the sex of the fetus in three ways: those believing in javaz (permission) hold that the drawbacks of applying this technique are rejectable. Those believing in hormat (sanctity) hold that manipulating fetal genes for unnecessary changes is wrong; Those believing in tafsil (details) hold that the use of this technique is correct only to prevent the transmission of genetic disorders or to treat diseases. In this research, with the descriptive - analytical and library method, the reasons for the legitimacy of gender selection in the jurisprudence of the two sects and the reasons for their opponents have been explained. The findings of this study show that gender selection is not permissible for non-medical reasons and solely on the basis of parents' preference for a particular sex. Assuming that there is no other way to maintain the health of the mother or fetus other than using gender selection techniques, rescuing the patient is rationally prior in the conflict between rescuing the patient and retrieving the cell from the fetus.

According to the Maa Yodhman rule, if after concluding the contract, it becomes clear that the contract was void, each party will be required to reject the other party in return. In the meantime, the application of the rules on patent transfer contracts should be carefully scrutinized, as it would be difficult to enforce the concept of a bill on such property and it would be difficult to enforce them. Therefore, the authors were encouraged to write the forthcoming article by gathering information in a library-based manner and using a descriptive-analytic method. The findings of this study show that due to the immaterial nature of the patent, it is collected differently and through the delivery of positive documents. Therefore, the Maa Yodhman rule in case of invalidity of the patent transfer contract is fully applied and the inventor is obliged to reject the exchange and the transferee is bound to return the exchange.

Permission is one of the most influential and fundamental institutions in Iranian jurisprudence and law, with its disagreement about its nature. Most of the jurisprudence and jurisprudence research has been done on permissible works and decrees, and its legal nature has rarely been analyzed. This descriptive-analytical paper seeks to answer the question of whether permitting is a one-sided legal act, namely, unilateral obligation, and whether its realization requires a revelation or a non-revelation. The results of the research show that in civil law, there is no regulation that defines the nature of this legal entity. Some jurists and jurists believe that permissiveness is purely a joke and not a matter of contract or indulgence. Others believe that permitting is a legal act. Legal action comes from the will of the will, but the will of permission lacks the face of the will. The effect of the permission is not the result of the will of the announcer but the fabric of the law, so it should be considered a legal event.

Some believe that islamic jurisprudence before pay attention to human rights, Leads man toward task-oriented. They have raised the some misconceptions such as islamic jurisprudence is based on the task and dependence of Western legal system on the right and conflict religious should and shouldn't with the right-oriented. Accordingly, in this research we are going to analyze right-oriented or Task-oriented of the islamic jurisprudence from the perspective of Sunni scholars and Imams' jurists, especially Ayatullah Javadi Amoli as creator of religious though. The method of this paper is to analyze-description. The research data was collected by using the library. Research findings it shows that with combining the horizons of religious scholars and expanding and integrating their votes can be obtained to important subscriptions. They agree on the idea that that language of jurisprudence is not only the language of duties but at times the jurisprudence is to appear language of duty, is spoken in order to ensure human rights. In fact jurisprudential should ways to preserve and protect the rights and jurisprudential shouldn't shows security injury rights. Thus, if a careful look at islamic jurisprudence, don't see unless the rights and interests and with this attitude we can say all tasks will return to rights.

The property which is offered for sale and possessed by buyer is terminologically called makhuz belsaum, the possessor is called akhez belsaum and the act is called akh belsaum. Delivery of property by the seller to the buyer may be considered either offer or promise to sell. The author in this paper seeks to answer the following question: what is the liability of the possessor of property with regard to property damage while in his possession? A group of jurists believe that he acts in a fiduciary capacity while the others consider him liable. Some jurists maintain that his liability is contractual while the others consider his liability as tort liability. The above said opinions have been studied through analytical-descriptive method and it has been concluded that the possessor is considered to be in a fiduciary capacity with regard to the property in his possession for testing and it is against legal logic and unjustifiable to consider liable a person who, by the owner's authorization possesses a property to test and verify and consider him as unauthorized possessor.

The question of freedom and its interpretation has been always the subject of contemplation by scholars and thinkers throughout the history. According to the atheistic view, the freedom is to be released from religious constraints, but monotheistic thinking calls the preservation of religious beliefs freedom. This issue becomes significant for the difference in understanding the meaning of freedom has led to regarding instrumental abuse of right to freedom as a measure falling in the ambit of freedom of opinion and expression by some western scholars. Meanwhile, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli determines series of criteria for freedom and elaborates on the compatibility and incompatibility of freedom with Islamic components. Therefore, the authors have examined the aforementioned discussion from the perspective of Ayatullah Javadi Amoli. The main purpose of this research is to study the value, explanatory and normative dimensions of the right to freedom of opinion and expression in the structure of various epistemological systems. The method of this paper is a descriptive-analytic one. In addition, data of the research was collected by means of a library-based approach. Findings of the research demonstrate that freedom in the philosophical system of this sage theologist is one of the sensual qualities that due to its uncertainty never can be absolute and unlimited. In accordance with this point of view, the real freedom becomes factual when is based upon wisdom and revelation.

The question of when in vitro embryos turn to living human beings, and should not therefore be destroyed, has been a matter of significance attracting Muslim jurisprudents special atention. The legitimacy of destroying in vitro embryos depends on when they acquire the status of living human beings. Religious scholars of the Sunni schools of law have very different and diverging opinions concerning this issue. In this comparative study, we aim to examine the prohibition of destruction of human embryos developed via in vitro fertilization from the perspective of Islamic schools and based on Islamic rules. The findings indicate that, according to the majority of Maliki jurisprudents, some Hanafi jurisprudents, Ghazali (a prominent Shafi’i jurisprudent), Ibn al-Jawzi (a prominent Hanbali jurisprudent) and the majority of Shi’ite jurisprudents, the sanctity of human embryos developed via in vitro fertilization depends on their establishment in the uterus. Therefore, it is legitimate to destroy in vitro embryos but only before they are located in the uterus.

More of multiple pregnancies resulting from in vitro fertilization - or medications."selective reduction of pregnancy" is a medical procedure to reduce multiple pregnancy. In such cases, one or more of the healthy embryo, fetus or mother sacrificed to maximize the chance of survival is longer. Regardless of the different approaches to reducing infant mortality, religion has also been studied in the scope of the problem.Judaism and Islam, by having a system of legal proof, carefully review it has different views on this matter have expressed.In this study we compared to an adaptive reduction of the embryos analyzed to Judaism and Islam. this study analyzes - descriptive study and its data are collected using a library. After explaining the concepts and principles to the analysis of legal texts of Islam are paid Jewish law. regardless of the scientific aspects of embryonic loss, Muslim and Jewish religious scholars are unanimously of the opinion that reducing fetal death do not count; however, since the establishment of the human embryo in the womb, deserves a degree of respect. Embryo reduction is not permitted except when necessary. The purpose of this requirement is to endanger the life or health of the mother or fetus, including needs arising from the impact of socio-economic factors are not.