فهرست مطالب mohammad mahdi anjom shoa’

Problem-solving research seeks to identify questions and problems that can be proposed and examined pertaining to an organizational issue or social event. This article as problem-solving research seeks to discern and identify legal questions and issues related to the unrest of 1401 in Iran. Identification and definition of these issues and questions provides a favorable ground for legal researchers to deal with the legal aspects of the 1401 unrest in Iran in the form of articles, theses, academic chairs, and even academic treatises. In addition, the results of this research can be useful for policymakers, planners, and legislators. The problem-solving nature of this research led to the writing of this article with the participation of 80 Iranian legal and judicial experts, of which 56 of them agreed to include their names as Co-author, and in this way, the indicator of the "number of authors" involved in the writing of a single article has also set a new record. The tools and methods of data collection in this research were library and case study methods, and the analysis of said data was carried out by the "content analysis" method. In this research, hundreds of questions or legal issues have been identified that can directly be used as subjects for research.

The conflict of ordinary documents with official documents has been one of the most critical legal issues after the approval of the Property Registration Law. In this regard, preferring the official document to ordinary document has been a dominant aspect of the discussion and the latter document, except for judicial proof of the latter legal event in the lawsuits of necessity to set the official document, has been rarely considered by judicial authorities. Over the decades, with the consensus of juridical opinions on legal attitudes, the dominance of the official document is weakened. Even the lawsuits of denial of the provisions of an official document, and proving the earlier legal events of the official document with referring to ordinary documents are sometimes dealt with. Approval of article 62 of the Act of Permanent Sentences of Development Plans could raise multiple reactions in criticizing that. However, its achievement was less considered in terms of meeting the impact of vote No.43-1351/8/10 of the General Board of Supreme Council and the official revival of recidivism of taking transaction conflicting with an ordinary document. As the said vote had denied the realization of the crime of conflicting transactions with the ordinary document because of default of incompetency of the conflict with an official document, article 62 accepted the conflict of ordinary documents with official documents and has affected the credit of unity of procedure.