جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « damages » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

The imposition of sanctions against Iran over many years has impacted crucial economic sectors, including the banking, energy, and industry as well as the health and medical systems and the scientific field of the country, leading to significant losses for natural and legal persons and raised questions regarding the methods of compensating and evaluating these damages. This research explores the forms of compensation in domestic and international law and examines the evaluation of material, moral and punitive damages. The compensation methods in domestic and international law generally follow a similar approach. Material damages can be compensated financially, whereas moral damages might not be adequately addressed through financial means alone; in such cases, non-financial methods like formal apologies, acceptance of violations, and expressing regret are utilized. Material damages can be evaluated with high accuracy using case-by-case criteria, ensuring the rights of the victims are not violated, and macroeconomic variables can be applied in extensive lawsuits. For moral damages, due to the complexity of calculating, a mixed criterion is preferable. Finally, in assessing punitive damages, the prolonged and severe impact of sanctions, along with the extent of material and moral damages, should considered.

The awarding of damages as compensation for trademark infringement has increasingly gained importance in the modernized economies of the world. The calculation and assessment of damages resulting from trademark rights violations have always posed a challenge for both judicial courts and official experts, as well as for the owners of these rights in proving the causal link between the infringing act and the incurred damage. For this reason, some countries' laws have introduced the concept of nominal or statutory damages alongside actual damages. Generally, the benefit that the infringer gains from violating trademark rights exceeds the damage suffered by the rights holder. Consequently, in England, the trademark owner has the option to choose between receiving actual damages and the infringer's profits. However, with the increase in trademark infringements and the growth of counterfeit goods, courts in the United States have recognized that awarding punitive damages may serve as a necessary deterrent to protect the interests of trademark owners.

In the legal system of Iran, there is no precise ruling regarding the recoverable damages when the buyer is unaware that the sold item belongs to someone else. The legislator, merely following the opinions of Imamiyyah jurists, has affirmed the possibility of claiming damages without defining the scope and limits of the ignorant buyer's claims from the seller in the event of the invalidity of the sale. This issue has become achallenge in the current economic conditions, considering the inflation rate index and the change in the real value of the price, which, in most cases, is money. Legal scholars have also considered this, meaning the exchange of goods for money in the definition of a sale. The issue has become a point of contention in judicial practice, legal scholars' opinions, and religious decrees. In an unauthorized sale, if the original owner rejects the transaction and takes possession of the sold item, the buyer can demand not only the return of the price but also compensation for other damages from the seller, provided that they were unaware of the unauthorized nature of the transaction at the time (Articles 262, 263, 324, 325, and 312 of the Civil Code). The law is not explicit about what recoverable damages from the seller are and what constitutes them. It only refers to the buyer's right to claim damages in Articles 263 and 391 without specifying the type, amount, or manner of recoverable damages, leaving the matter unaddressed. In contrast, the Egyptian Civil Code, drawing from the theory of relative nullity of contracts, has precisely clarified this issue.

Imagine that A has witnessed an incident in which B injures or kills C. It is undoubtedly painful to witness, but does it also follow that one can recover damages for suffering emotional distress as the result of witnessing the accident? The recognition of the tort of negligent infliction of emotional harm, also known as NIED, has been one of the ways that tort law has attempted to provide a remedy for the emotionally injured. Nevertheless, the relatively new tort has raised many questions. In the U.S. legal system, different criteria have been proposed over the years to allow for NIED liability. For example, the impact rule and the zone of danger have been amongst the most popular. This Article focuses on the latest exception which is the bystander liability and its evolution. It is the liability to a person who witnesses a person being injured or killed due to the carelessness of another person. This Article compares the U.S. common law precedent with Iran’s civil liability regime and concludes that bystander emotional harm can also be recognized as a valid cause of action for redressing this type of emotional harm in the Iranian legal system. Bystander liability comes with the caveat of close relationship between the bystander and the injured individual. As such, this requirement should be based on the norms of the community that may differ from one another.

In the realm of civil procedures, the right to bring a lawsuit traditionally hinges upon the claim of the injured party seeking compensation for harm caused by the actions of the defendant. According to this conventional perspective, the initiation of a lawsuit by a third party, without the consent of the injured party, has been deemed inconceivable and lacking legal rationale. This article challenges the fundamentals of this prevailing approach, demonstrating that in specific cases where the beneficiary faces difficulties or is unwilling to engage in legal proceedings, the involvement of a third party as the instigator of the claim can be legally justifiable and desirable. This alternative perspective calls for a reevaluation of existing laws and regulations regarding third-party claims, ultimately enhancing the societal function of liability law and facilitating access to legal procedures for resolving disputes. In addition to addressing the issues and ambiguities associated with this approach, the article also explores potential challenges and solutions for resolving them. In some legal systems, formalizing third-party claims can enhance the effectiveness of the legal framework, better protect citizens, and establish behavioral norms within society. When determining the responsible party in civil liability claims, legal rules have undergone significant changes, resulting in multiple criteria and interpretations for assessing the scope of an individual's responsibility for  harmful actions. Today, causation is not solely based on identifying the closest cause, and individuals may consider themselves defendants if they can demonstrate a more reasonable position in preventing harm. Furthermore, the pursuit of damages against individuals with financial advantages or superior risk management capabilities has been defended. Conversely, the criteria for identifying the plaintiff have been less contentious. Despite minimal legal debate regarding the concept of loss and its sustainable forms, civil procedures universally emphasize the requirement of the injured party to initiate a claim. The only accepted basis for determining the plaintiff is that the individual suffered harm due to the defendant's injurious act. The intersection of civil procedures and civil liability is where third-party lawsuits for compensation come into play. Traditionally, the purpose of civil procedures has been to facilitate the compensation of damages through the law of liability, with the injured party serving as the initiator of the legal process and claimant for compensation. Consequently, the initiation of a claim for compensation by a third party has lacked legal rationale and practical viability. However, a reinterpretation of the essentials acknowledges the victim's desire to file a lawsuit. This approach revitalizes the societal role of law and recognizes that, beyond individual-centered aspects of proceedings, third parties may bring claims if the failure of the injured party to do so disrupts social order. Such an approach can deter reckless behavior and the violation of societal norms. While the criterion for identifying the claimant remains fundamental in litigation, it acquires a broader interpretation. Claimant status is extended to any individual who, by informing the legal framework about the occurrence of harm, requests legal proceedings and the sanctioning of the injuring party. Implementing this approach, which offers numerous advantages, necessitates legislative amendments to regulate its use. Based on the arguments presented, it is recommended that legal reforms clarify that the primary rule for seeking compensation is for the injured party to initiate the action. However, if a third party initiates the action, and after verifying the accuracy of the information provided, the court hears the claim by notifying the injured party. Upon confirming the claim's validity, a portion of the compensation will be awarded to the third party. If the victim declines to accept the remainder, it can be allocated to a fund aimed at reducing similar losses in the future. This article explores the possibility of third-party claims for damages as an exceptional and conditional approach with legal advantages. Key questions addressed in this article include the justification of third-party lawsuits based on general principles and rules, their advantages and disadvantages, their validity within Iran's legal system, and potential solutions for harnessing their benefits while mitigating their drawbacks.

The concept of good faith is recognized in many legal systems and entails significant implications. It has received particular attention and influence in German and English law across various fields. The liability of non-owner possessors (in both legal and material terms) represents one of the most important areas. This paper aims to examine the possibility of the impact of good faith on the liability of non-owner possessors regarding damages caused to the subject of possession, as well as the quality of this impact, through a library-based comparative analysis. In German and English law, the recognition of the concept of good faith and the emphasis on attributing damages to the conduct of the possessor to recognize their liability, alongside the influence of good faith in establishing this attribution, have allowed the good faith of the possessor to eliminate or mitigate their liability in both tortious (obligatory) and contractual contexts. However, in domestic law, the influence of jurisprudence and the scope of the concepts of usurpation and quasi-usurpation, particularly in cases of material possessions, limits the support for a possessor acting in good faith, and it seems that the solution to protecting a possessor acting in good faith lies in distinguishing between the usurper and the quasi-usurper. On the other hand, in legal possessions, the attribution of damages to the conduct of the possessor receives more importance, and to some extent, the situation is similar to German and English law.

"Damages in lieu of performance" is one of the three types of damages for breach of contract provided by the German Civil Code. The main objective of this research is to examine this remedy in German law. Specifically, this study addresses the question of how, in a legal system that upholds the principle of contractual necessity and considers specific performance as the primary remedy for a breach of contract, damages can substitute for the actual fulfillment of the obligation. While the term "damages in lieu of performance" is not explicitly used in Iranian laws, certain instances of this type of damage have been explored in legal literature. By comparing these two concepts within the German and Iranian legal systems, it becomes evident that the German Civil Code provides precise and effective rules governing damages in lieu of performance, thereby offering a solid foundation for the comparative adaptation of such rules in Iranian law.

The upcoming research is under the title of compensation for damage caused by the illegal seizure of a ship in international law, although there are articles and written articles in Persian and English with the titles of compensation for damage caused by the seizure of a ship in the international law of the seas, so far the article or book in Persian and English with Paying attention to the principles of government responsibility has rarely been published. Therefore, we felt it necessary to study and research in this regard. The research method suitable for the present topic is the library method of collecting the necessary information and data and the descriptive-analytical method and analyzing and analyzing the information. In this way, first by using the library method to collect the necessary information and data from the library sources, and then to analyze them using the descriptive-analytical method. The analysis tool is also logical and legal reasoning with the study. The articles and documents are related. The results of this research is one of the tools through which free navigation can be protected in the international arena, creating responsibility for governments. From the subjects of the international community, it is burdened that in case of violation of that obligation, the responsibility of that government will follow in compensating the damages caused by the seizure of the ship.

The purpose of this research is to provide a scientific and practical model in order to understand the nature of liability insurance contracts in sports so that the elements of sports (managers, coaches and athletes) are aware of the need to have insurance coverage for accidents and injuries that may be possible for sports people, especially athletes. be informed if it occurs. Since the present research does not require sampling and interviews, data analysis has been done by description and analysis in a library method, and it has been tried to see what the perspective of the courts and judicial procedure is in such cases.The results of the research showed that insurance obligations for the loss of victims caused by sports accidents should be examined from the perspective of professional sports, so that before concluding an insurance contract, all possible possibilities for insurance coverage are considered by coaches and managers of sports teams and clubs and even national teams. should be placed so that insurance companies do not refuse to pay damages when faced with accidents. The main question that has been raised in this research is that to what extent is the scope of responsibility of insurance providers in sports venues in front of the victims?Based on the results of the research, if people have an accident resulting in physical injuries while attending and using sports facilities and performing exercises and competitions,

Contracts are very important tools for regulating business relationships and reducing the risks associated with it. Due to the importance of contracts, it is necessary to be careful in setting them up and consider the key terms and conditions to protect your interests. The purpose of this article is the terms effective on risk management in contracts.
This article is descriptive and analytical. The materials and data are also qualitative and Materials and data are non-qualitative.  data collection has been used in the collection of materials and data.
Ethical Considerations: In this article, the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness are respected.
The condition of obligation to compensate contractual damages, the condition of exemption from liability and the condition of force majeure, the change of circumstances and the condition of contract adjustment, the condition of paying the price in currency or gold, the condition of the governing law and the condition of insurance are among the most important conditions affecting risk management in contracts. Contractual allocation of risk based on the principle of contractual freedom and considering the preferences and limitations of the parties in maximizing contractual returns is considered the most effective and efficient method of allocation.
Since the source of risk is a set of certain events or conditions that alone or in combination with other elements cause uncertainty or risk and as a result, effects are actualized that lead to unexpected deviations in the goals of the contract, including profit. or losses, therefore, effective terms on risk management in contracts can lead to risk reduction and help the stability and continuity of contracts.

According to Article 391 of the Civil Code and the unified judgments 733-1393/07/15 and 811-1400/01/04 of the General Board of the Supreme Court, if the sold things has been determined as belonging to another, the sale contract is null. Therefore in case of unawareness of the buyer, the vendor must pay the difference through price which is paid as consideration and the actual value of the sold object on the day of sale as compensation in addition to returning the price. The apparent interpretation of the aforementioned provisions limits them to the nullity of the sale contract due to unauthorization regarding the owner's rejection. But firstly it’s good to know that nullity causes damages in other types of contracts rather than sales. Then it should be known that nullity can be caused by reasons differing from the cause of belonging to a third party. Thirdly, must be said that the contract may cause damages not in terms of nullity, but in other types of dissolution. This research aims to answer the question whether it is possible to apply the provisions related to the damage caused by the nullity of unauthorized sale to other cases of nullity and dissolution of all contracts or not? And assuming the answer to the previous question is positive, what are the examples of the implementation of the aforementioned provisions? The collection of information in this research is library-based and the method of presenting is analytical.

Methodical understanding of hadith" depends on the application of "rules of understanding". On the other hand, simply applying the rules of understanding does not lead to the realization of methodical understanding, but it is also necessary to pay attention to the disadvantages of understanding. Ignoring the harms of understanding disrupts the methodical understanding of the hadith, and it takes the researcher away from the speaker's main intention. One of the disadvantages of understanding hadith is neglecting the source of hadith. The following article seeks to calculate the consequences of neglecting the source of hadith. With the effort that was made, it became clear that so far no writing has been published about the contexts and consequences of neglecting the source of hadith. This research, which was carried out with a descriptive-analytical method, has come to the conclusion that according to the mentioned method, The grounds of neglecting the source of Hadith are: miswriting, distortion, fragmentation, illusion of the narrator, substitution and synonymy. Also, the consequences of not paying attention to the sources of hadith include: perception of conflict between hadith, incorrect understanding of hadith, creation of problems in hadith, perception of meaninglessness of hadith and generalization.

The spread of advanced technologies and tools, especially in the field of digital media, which provide the possibility of spying on other people's affairs easily, has created concerns about the loss of some legitimate expectations through privacy violations. Privacy is a realm of people's lives that a human being, understanding the norms of the society, does not allow to violate in any situation. This right is the individual's right to control and regulate his personal activities and private and confidential decisions without external interference, observation or aggression, which also includes his confidential and private information. The purpose of this article is to compare the media's civil responsibility for privacy violations in the laws of Iran and England, and for this purpose, it is organized with a descriptive and analytical approach. Findings from the comparative analysis of Iranian and English law show that the theory of fault has been accepted in Iranian law.In Iranian law, despite the protection of some examples of privacy, and the general treatment of it in the principles of the constitution, this issue has not been comprehensively addressed. And the legal protection of privacy is scattered and case-by-case, and these protections are not complete. Certain laws, such as the Press Law and the Electronic Commerce Law, provide privacy protections. Also, the important jurisprudential rule of harmlessness can be considered as the basis of civil responsibility in this field. According to the rule, the privacy of individuals cannot be violated, except as prescribed by the law or with the consent of the individuals themselves. So, if the media causes damage to people, they must compensate. And despite all the merits of the protective approach scattered in various laws of our country, although Islamic sources are the source of the compilation of Iran's laws and are rich from this point of view, the legislature has not made sufficient use of it. One of the most important shortcomings in the protection of privacy effects is the lack of an independent protective law, the lack of identification of some cases of gross privacy violations, such as the unauthorized production of images and non-material violation of spatial privacy.Now, compared to Iran, England's supportive approach is much more favorable in some aspects, especially the privacy of communications, information and data. The records in the legal system of this country show that the court has considered compensation for privacy violations in some cases, but there is no explicit guarantee for the right to privacy in this country, and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is still Not applied in English law. The courts have determined punishments in the issued votes by using the rules established for other purposes and some violations of the media. The legislature of this country has focused on following and harmonizing its legal provisions in the field of respecting the private life of individuals with international standards. data, and in this passage, he explained the regulations regarding the cases of legal interception in the field of privacy of communications, and fully anticipated and supported the principles and rights of using data, and also tried to comprehensively explain the cases regarding the interferences caused by It has put the public domain in contact with the privacy domain and has explicitly accepted the rule of invalidation for the reason of illegitimate violation of privacy.The conclusion of the research showed that the approval of the independent protection law, the legal clarification of the concept and standard of cleanliness and the identification of privacy from public privacy, the resolution of ambiguity and regulation of interventions resulting from the confrontation of the public sphere with the private sphere, and the explanation of preventive methods in the face of violent behavior in the field Privacy is very important. Approval and clear legal clarification regarding the demarcation of the exercise of sovereign authority and citizen's rights, especially in the face of international and virtual media and state media regarding the privacy of individuals, according to principles 22-23 and 25 of the Constitution and the dynamic jurisprudence of the Imamiyyah. Under the Civil Rights Law with a view to the Freedom of Information Law. Therefore, sometimes the exercise of sovereign authority can appear to be different from the protection of privacy due to the rights of citizens. According to the principles of the constitution and the text of the Holy Quran and hadith and the jurisprudential nature of the laws, this demarcation can be authorized so that both the domestic and international media, as well as individuals and judicial and security agents, can get a clear picture of the framework by referring to it. have their functions legally. Especially in interactive media where privacy violations can include a range of media - governance and individuals at the same time.

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 occurrence of a crime in a society causes disruption of the general order of that society, and in other words, it causes damage to the body of the society ;Based on this, in terms of the damage that the society feels from the occurrence of a crime, it considers itself entitled to file a complaint against the guilty person .The current research deals with the issue of damage caused by crime, which is one of the most challenging topics, which is specified as necessary in the current principles, laws and regulations ;But how to compensate and how to evaluate it has not been determined. In the legal systems of different countries, solutions are considered for compensation, However, there is no fixed and specific criteria for compensation methods.

As a new technology, the Internet of Things has accelerated the transformative role of digital technologies, and the use of Internet of Things devices by consumers is increasing significantly every year. The relationship between the risks associated with these products and the use of this technology may cause problems and damage. One of these issues is the damage that is caused to people and property, and one of the most important goals is to determine which person can be attributed for the damage. And what is the responsibility? The present article, with the analytical-descriptive method, is trying to study the basic rules of civil liability due to product production by stating the existing theories of the basis of responsibility in terms of the current situation and the latest developments in this field, in such a way that the group of manufacturers of IoT devices due to production The defective and damaging product will have liability, the basis of liability of IoT device manufacturers will generally be based on the product liability theory, and the strict liability theory applies to high-risk commercial users such as the medical sector, and the negligence liability theory is suitable for non-commercial users. And the theory of responsibility for breach of warranty can be applied between the manufacturers of Internet of Things devices and their buyers and users. And this issue has gained double importance due to its novelty and various applications, and despite the feeling of emptiness in domestic laws, the clarification of this issue is an undeniable necessity.

Education field experts believe that effects and consequences of the Coronavirus pandemic on education in general and on higher education in particular are not only less than the other social institutions, but are much more comprehensive. In this study, an attempt is being made to represent lived experiences and perceptions of students and teachers in the virtual education system. Therefore, the main purpose of this research is to assess the same among professors and students of the University of Isfahan during the Covid-19 pandemic in order to identify the most important challenges of this type of education in universities and by relying on the findings of the study, effective solutions and approaches are presented for improving virtual education in universities. In the course of study, “phenomenology” has been used as a qualitative method whereas the research population includes all students and professors in the University of Isfahan in the academic year of 2020-2021. Total participants in the qualitative part of research were 32 people consisting of 14 professors and 18 students. Based on the purposive sampling, a mixture was selected and interviewed. The data was evaluated using Colaizzi’s seven step method (1978).  Findings showed that the damages incurred by virtual education damage are: “educational damage”, “damages related to university culture”, damages related to social-economic infrastructures” and “damage from reduced sense of presence”.

The scope of activities of commercial companies is much wider than that of real traders, and equally important is the bankruptcy of commercial companies. One of the commercial companies is a joint stock company, which is a company of individuals and its credit depends on the credit of its partners, and if the creditors of this company fail to meet their claims from the company due to insufficient property, Individually and by referring to all of them will be jointly and severally. Regarding the claim for contractual damages (obligation) in Iranian law, both in civil law and in commercial law, it is not possible to change the amount of damages agreed by the court with the explicit ruling of the legislator. In Iranian law, the obligation to pay damages is limited, but this procedure is not accepted in foreign law, including in common law, written law and Egyptian law, and the judge can change the amount of contractual damages if certain conditions are met. In foreign law, the obligation can be both in the form of lump sum damages and can have the aspect of a punitive condition. Therefore, if the court finds and concludes that the obligation has a punitive aspect. Hence, he can order non-payment.