جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « طرفین دعوی » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

Judicial supervision is considered as integral part of the process. In two legal systems of Iran and France, these two Fights are acceptable in the appeal stage. A comparative study of the two entities in the two legal systems shows that in most rules they are similar and there are slight differences between them. Third-party involvement in the appeal stage is one of the exceptions to the principle of prohibition of interference by persons other than the parties to the case The deadline for a third-party litigation in Iran is until the end of the first hearing, while in France until the end of the investigation. The condition of acceptance of a lawsuit in France is the transformation of the lawsuit. The transformation of litigation occurs when new facts of truth or a are discovered. The jurisdiction of a judge to obtain a third party under certain conditions in French law is another difference with Iran, while in Iran this is not possible. Some of the rules of third party intervention in the appeal stage are not mentioned in the law and must be determined by law. Third-party Claims in French law are admissible upon termination.

The definite principle is that regarding the holding of hearings and their administration, whenever the legal standards such as notification in accordance with the law are not met, and also the absence of death and death of the parties, as well as the application of the provisions of the petition to the legal standards, and the meeting is held unnecessarily. Also, if during the administration of the hearing, the beginning and end of the proceedings and also the public proceedings are not done and there is a lack of order in general, there will be a guarantee of execution, so that it will not only result in the disciplinary violation of the judge, but will also cause In some cases, the vote is invalid, and in higher authorities, it sometimes causes the cancellation of the document. The realization of the right and the implementation of justice in the courts require that the platform and context be provided for the litigants so that the parties can easily present their claims and arguments. Regarding the way of administration, although there are major legal issues in this collection, there are still legal gaps. For example, it is not clear whether the meeting will continue or not if one of the litigants and their lawyer disrupts it. Therefore, in this article, we intend to state each of the examples that lead to the examination of the reasons for the necessity of order in the hearing.