دکتر وحید قاسمی عهد

Claims to prove ownership of immovable property is one of the most common and voluminous legal claims. According to the registration status of immovable properties, each of them is in a special registration status, there is a difference of opinion regarding the acceptance of claims to prove ownership of immovable properties in the judicial procedure, there is no end to this matter, especially in the case of properties that have a registration history and their registration history. Unfinished is more. On the other hand, there are situations where the petitioner is forced to go to the court and has no other choice, the general task of handling claims by the courts also requires the necessity of hearing the claim. The current research is of qualitative type and its method is library and document studies. The subject of the present research is the investigation and classification of cases of proof of ownership that may be presented in the court in each of the stages of property registration, and the consideration and issuance of a verdict in each of these cases has its own special effects. The results showed that; Standardization of the plan and hearing of the claim for proof of ownership in the case of immovable property leads to the unification of the judicial procedure and preventing the issuance of conflicting opinions in similar cases and creating satisfaction in the clients of the judiciary,.

The transaction option with the development of financial markets, especially the stock market and securities in Iran, entered the legal, jurisprudential and legal issues of Iran. Therefore, due to the alteration between this type of contract and the usual contracts in the legal and jurisprudential system, their nature and validity were questioned and many opponents and supporters among jurists and legislators were found. Since the arrival of this type of contract in Iran, its principle has been challenged, the most important factor of which has been different are the legal, jurisprudential and legal attitudes towards it. Therefore, in this study, with a different approach from previous studies examining this type of contract from only one perspective or at least two perspectives, an attempt has been made with a comparative approach to examine the nature of these contracts from three legal, jurisprudential and legal perspectives. An independent approach to these three approaches scrutinizes these types of agreements. Studies show that conflicts, contradictions and disputes over the nature of this type of contract are the result of ignoring the independent nature of this type of contract and none of these three approaches have given an independent principle to these contracts and to form this type of agreement in other contracts under other terms and conditions, and this is one of the most important causes of contradictions, conflicts and disputes in this area. However, these types of contracts have an independent and unique nature.

Examining the nature of the transaction option from three perspectives: law, jurisprudential and legal with a comparative approachInvestigating the causes of conflicts, contradictions and disputes over the nature of such contracts in law, jurisprudence and legal issues.

Research questions:

What is the legal and jurisprudential meaning and nature of the transaction option?What are the types of option contracts and what are their applications?

 There is no end to the dispute over the admissibility of a claim for proof of ownership of immovable property in the jurisprudence. On the other hand, there are situations in which the plaintiff has to go to court and has no choice but to do so. The general duty of the courts to hear cases also necessitates a hearing. The subject of the present study is the examination and classification of forms of property proof lawsuits that may be raised in court at any of the stages of property registration. The consideration and issuance of a ruling in each of these forms has its own special effects. This research has been done in a descriptive and analytical manner based on library sources and the use of judicial opinions issued. Seeks to reduce clients.

The purpose of this article is to review and study the rules of civil procedure (formal and substantive aspects) in Iranian law with a comparative view of England.
This research is of theoretical type and the research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library and has been done by referring to documents, books and articles.
The findings indicate that in English law, the principle of formality of civil proceedings is a set of ceremonies and rituals that must be followed in order to achieve the result expected from the proceedings. In English law, according to the principle of dominance of the parties in civil proceedings, the court does not have jurisdiction to hear, unless each of the litigants Ask it to take such action in accordance with the legal conditions.
Ethical Considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed.
With a comparative study, we reached these results that in civil procedure In England, principles and strategies are implemented whose basis can only be analyzed in the form of the principle of predictability of civil proceedings. These works are a guarantee of fair civil proceedings and usually their realization in practice shows the real commitment of the judicial system to strategic principles.

In the study of Barati documents (checks, Barat and promissory notes) in this research, we came to the conclusion that they follow principles and rules such as "principle of non-hearing of objections" and "abstract description". Despite the great importance of these principles, most jurists have examined them briefly without specifying the relationship between them, which has caused many questions and ambiguities. In this study, to answer the questions, we have used descriptive and analytical methods as well as explanatory and inferential methods, and it was concluded that the principle of non-hearing of defects in Barati documents, in addition to basic relational defects, is necessary. Also apply to your transaction defects. In addition, the exceptions to each of these are different. It was also found that only the principle of not listening to the objections of these documents regarding the basic relationship is the result and fruit of the abstract description and not the mentioned principle regarding your relationship.

The contract of option with the development of financial markets, especially the stock market and securities in Iran, entered into the legal, jurisprudential and legal issues of Iran. Therefore, due to the difference between this type of contract and the usual contracts in the legal and jurisprudential system, their nature and validity were questioned and found many opponents and supporters among jurists, jurists and legislators. Since the arrival of this type of contract in Iran, its nature has been challenged, the most important factor of which has been different legal, jurisprudential and legal attitudes towards it. Therefore, in this study, with a different approach from previous studies that have examined this type of contract from only one perspective and at most two perspectives, an attempt has been made with a comparative approach in addition to examining the nature of these contracts from three legal, jurisprudential and legal perspectives. An independent approach to these three approaches examines these types of contracts. Studies show that conflicts, contradictions and disputes over the nature of this type of contract are the result of ignoring the independent nature of this type of contract and none of these three approaches have given an independent nature to these contracts and have tried to form this type of contract in other contracts. And examine contracts under other terms and conditions, and this is one of the most important causes of contradictions, conflicts and disputes in this area. However, these types of contracts have an independent and unique nature.

The most important principle in concluding a contract is the possibility of its execution. The discussion of adjustment in the contractual implementation and the guarantee of its implementation is raised if after the conclusion of the contract due to reasons that are not attributable to the contracting parties, its implementation becomes impossible. Obstruction in contract execution is an important issue in most legal systems such as England, while there are differences regarding this issue.According to Article 229 of the Civil Code of Iran, the obligor is exempted from fulfilling the obligation. However, if due to the occurrence of accidents and changes in the circumstances at the time of the conclusion of the contract, the execution of the contract causes excessive difficulty or unusual loss for the obligee, and at the same time the execution of the obligation is not impossible, the law of our country does not provide a clear solution in this case. slowIn this article, we will do a comparative study of the conditions and obligation of the rule of default in Iranian law and the conditions of contract adjustment in English law and how to implement it and we will state the differences. In fact, the goal of achieving uniform rules based on comparative legal principles will be to create a uniform procedure for judicial courts.

Commercial documents follow principles and rules such as the "principle of non-hearing of objections" and the "abstract description". In spite of the great importance of these principles, most jurists have given a brief overview of them, and some have tried to interpret and explain them according to the jurisprudence and principles governing civil rights. This has led to many questions and ambiguities. In this study, in order to answer the proposed questions, we have used descriptive and analytical methods as well as explanatory and inferential methods, and it was concluded that the principle of non-hearing of objections, in addition to basic relationship problems, should also be applied to objections of commercial transactions. In addition, we pointed out that the exceptions for each of these cases are different; because while the direct holder as well as the holder who has no good will are the only exceptions to the above principle regarding the basic relationship. The exceptions to this principle regarding the objections of commercial transactions can be divided into two parts: first that leads to absolute decline of commitment of the committed and second that causes relative decline in commitment.

End-of-life care providers to patients in the later stages of the disease are potentially exposed to a variety of judicial, legal and professional problems. This study was to review and analyze these challenges and ways to deal with them.

In this systematic review study, some aspects of end-of-life care such as patient decision-making competence, discontinuation of life support treatments and useless or ineffective treatments and requesting death assistance with targeted search in 8 databases and reviewing 44 sources, from a legal point of view. An analysis was made.

The biggest challenges in the field of assisting in the death of patients, choosing the right person to decide in the final stages and ending the treatment were seen as useless or ineffective. In many countries, laws were enacted to discontinue life-sustaining treatments, and the process of judicial proceedings was to accept the requests of patients or their alternative representatives. Gradually, more and more countries have legalized end-of-life assistance in terms of conditional assistance.

The legal challenges to end-of-life and how to deal with it vary in different societies and legal intervention in end-of-life lawsuits be avoided as much as possible.

With the approval of the Law on Registration of Deeds and Property of the country, the main goal is to register all properties in the property registration office and issue ownership certificates for properties so that while preserving the sovereign rights of the government, the ownership of individuals is stabilized and its transfer is subject to a specific system. And to avoid numerous lawsuits in this regard. In addition, the registration authority and the official ownership of the persons of the registration office. Failure to fully implement the provisions of the Property and Deeds Registration Act in practice and the adoption of other interim laws that were not effective, as well as the legislator's approach in Article 62 of the Law on Permanent Provisions of the Development Plan, caused many disputes between individuals over immovable property Inevitably, it has made the entry of judicial authorities necessary to resolve disputes and issue verdicts. However, the claim for proof of ownership of immovable property is not always a civil lawsuit based on interfaith intercession and in full accordance with the description, and has been brought before the judiciary for other reasons and purposes. The study of these causes and objectives by researching the judicial procedure and the effects of the rulings issued in this regard is the subject of this article.

Undoubtedly, the purpose of concluding any contract is to implement its provisions and commit to the effects resulting from that contract. In order for the contract not to encounter any obstacles in its implementation, its contents should be clear and the parties should not have any disputes about the terms of validity and terms of the contract and how to implement it, and after the agreement of the parties and the conclusion of the contract, the most important issue In the opinion of the parties to the contract, timely performance of the contractual obligations is necessary, because the violation of the contract is not in the interest of the parties. In the discussion of the implementation of the movable sale contract, it is important to examine its conditions, such as: demand and acceptance, the competence of the parties to the transaction and the conditions of sale, the principle of sovereignty of will, etc. This article aims to have a comparative view between the two systems of Iran and England in the structure of the sale contract with a descriptive-analytical approach, while briefly examining the characteristics and conditions of sale to explain and the principles of the rule of will. The results of the research showed that the interpretation of the contract paves the way for the correct implementation of the correct contract by clarifying the terms and expressions and the intention of the parties according to the logic (principle of sovereignty of the will).

Adhesion contract is A standard of contract drafted by one party and offered to other party, who must adhere to the contract and therefore does not have the power to negotiate the terms of the contract and only can "take it or leave it" .many of insurance(not all of them) contract are adhesion contract. Insurer with stronger bargaining power, According to the requirements of the insurance industry, standardized or drafted terms and conditions in the form of contract, and insured only can accept or reject it . for nature of this contracts, some times, there are vague , suprising and conscionable terms in this contract. In This paper , ways of protcting of insured in us law in this contract introduced, including cotra proferentem, rule of esstopel, doctrine uncoscionable contract or terms and principle of reasonable expectation and then be cosidered to what extent these methods are applicable in Iran law.

methods in Iran and UK legal system have been comparatively investigated. This concept, although not defined in Iran laws but by regarding the available legal sources such as Constitution, Civil Liability Act and other laws, there is no doubt for demanding it specially for natural persons and private legal persons and for compensating it, restitutionary and non-financial methods such as apologizing, publishing judgment in newspaper, mutual accountability and also financial compensation are stipulated. However in judicial precedent, compensation of such damage -especially through financial methods- is less accepted. Vice versa in UK legal system, the main method of compensation includes libel and slander by paying some money that, as the case maybe, is made by compensatory damage, symbolic or nominal damage, contemptuous or exemplary damage and the only restitution is injunction. Filing claims on defamation has been common in this country since medieval and so far a lot of judgment has been issued in this case and some rules have been approved. Of course, filing such claims is merely possible for alive natural persons and legal persons like commercial companies and governmental organizations do not have this right.

Expectation interest with the approach of the motivation support of parties from conclusion of the agreement is accepted as the most efficient criterion for assessing contractual damages in Common European Sales Law, Draft Common Frame of Reference and Principles of European Law. Expectation interest means to put the contractual injured party in the position if the contract had been performed. This theory, not only has its particular bases and principles, but also can be justified through the principles governing contractual remedies such as the principle selection freedom of the efficient remedies. Theoretically the principles such as the Transactional nature of the contract, contract as a property and consistency with the theory of efficient breach necessity of playing equal to the rate at the payment the full compensation principle can be cited. Although this criterion has faced some challenges in Iranian law according to article 515 of the civil procedure law, but assessing damages based on this criteria according to the effect that can have on the motivation of parties regarding conclusion of the agreement,optimal allocation of resources, reaching to the contractual objective has particular efficiency. So the current article studies on feasibility of acceptance in Iranian law with the efficiency analysis of this criteria and its relation with particular efficiency.

Freedom of choosing an efficient remedy after the breach of contract, Cumulation of homogeneous remedies and the right to change the selected remedy in modern European contract law have been accepted via the approach of support of the injured party`s expectation interest . The consideration of these principles indicates that the remedies for breach of contract are not concerned in itself and the desirable security of the parties is of utmost importance. Although acceptance of these principles in Iranian law accompanys some limitations, especially regarding the freedom of choosing the remedy of termination and seeking recovery prior to obliging to fulfill the exact obligation, but the importance of quickly determining the fate of transactions, decreasing the damages and the volume of claims and actions, necessitate to look at the remedies for breach of obligations as away or a means, and that the injured party could select the proper remedy according to the amount of desirability of contract and according to the circumstances surrounding it, and could decrease the negative effects of non efficient remedy, undertaking of the injured party to confront the damages emphasizes on this point, so in present article, as a result of analyzing the efficiency of the Expectation Interest Theory and its efficacy of economic complexities of some if the statutory remedies, it is to be dealt with the necessity of consideration and acceptance of the well-known and identified principles at modern European law in Iranian law including the principle of Equivalence of the Remedies, so as be attained the highest amount of efficiency