hosein javar

One of the requirements in the field of legal discussions is to find consistent and reliable foundations for the challenges related to issues such as environmental degradation. This study aims to find a local basis for the protection and preservation of the environment, especially where the environment is devastated and degraded. The question arises here is that among the local principles, can the rule of respect be used in the protection and preservation of the environment and for the liability resulting from its destruction and damage? In order to achieve the objectives of the research, the necessary data have been collected from library sources and were examined via the descriptive-analytical method. Based on the findings of the present study, the rule of respect is known as one of the possible principles in justifying civil liability for violating the right in the realm of the environment. The need to respect and protect the environment are justifiable on the one hand, given the intrinsic value of the environment and secondly, its instrumental value for better life of the human and its significant economic value in human life and also, the substantial damages that destructive actions against the environment inflict on human life and his/her material and spiritual benefits. On the other hand, arguments of respect, incidentally, include both financial and non-transactional aspects. In addition, the integrity of this protection, inevitably, requires that it be justified in case of violation of liability for compensation of harmful and destructive action against the environment.

On the one hand, the right of property of employer generally requires that any possession be permitted for him/her, even if the possession leads to the violation of the privacy of the workers and employees. On the other hand, respect for the privacy of individuals, including workers, requires that the confidentiality of their information and communications be protected and consequently, all of the actions violating privacy be forbidden. The question which arises here is how to act in the event of a conflict between these two rights? In the American law, most of the courts, with some considerations, take the employer's side on the basis of "the employer's right to own the workplace space", "the workshop policy right" as well as "the lack of confidentiality and lack of normal expectation of privacy". In Iranian law, it seems that on the one hand, the exercise of the employer's right, in practice, corresponds to the violation of another's right and loss, and on the other hand, the impossibility of exercising the supervision right is to the detriment of the employer and his interests. Therefore, based on the “rule of importance” the priority is given to the right of the one of more s9gnificance. In this regard, it can be said that the employer, in order to bring the two interfering rights together, can take actions to control the relationships among the workers inside the network under his supervision with the prior allowance or announcement. In this case, the electronic communication of workers can be considered within the scope of the "execution" (Eqdam) and "extinction of respect" (Esqat-e-Ehteram) rules. In this paper, through a descriptive-analytic method, the relationship between these two rights in the two mentioned systems is studied.

The private secrets of famous people, those under the focus of public opinion of the society, like political and non-political celebrities such as artists, actors, athletes and models, are strongly favored by many people. Whether celebrities have the same privacy as ordinary people or whether the realm of their privacy is more limited than the rest of society, there are disagreements regarding the restriction of the privacy of celebrities and equality of that with others. According to the first theory, for lack of privacy of celebrities or at least limitation of its territory, some reasons are alleged such as lack of normal expectation, Iqdam Rule, Patternity of famous individuals, public benefits, right to know and critique of hypocrisy. Based on the second theory, the principle is that people in society are at a level of privacy and that just because people are famous or role models for others does not violate their privacy. According to this view, if celebrities are in a position to reasonably expect their privacy,  like others, their privacy should be respected. Reasonable expectations of privacy can be identified in components such as the place being monitored, the subject of the surveillance, the manner in which personal information is used, the means of surveillance, the satisfaction of the person subject to the privacy and the nature of the relationship.