جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « no influence » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

Improper influence means the abuse of spiritual influence with the aim of reaching unfair and unjust contracts, which exists in all societies. This theory was first proposed by the Court of Justice to modify and adjust the contract in order to protect the weak party of the contract in English law. There is no mention of this title in Imamiyyah jurisprudence and Hanafi jurisprudence, but its examples are abundantly seen in social behaviors. The question is whether Imamiyyah and Hanafi jurisprudence have a plan to support the deprived class who are oppressed through influence. In Afghan law, which is based on Hanafi jurisprudence, there are legal articles (698, 631, 621)civil law, and in Imamiyyah jurisprudence there are rules (the rule of no harm and the principle of justice) that protect people who are subject to abuse by influential people. And according to those rules, any kind of illegal transaction is forbidden and non-enforceable, and receiving any money through it is considered to be invalid, contrary to Sharia and legal regulations, and one of the examples of unlawful ownership. key words: rulings, works, undue influence, contract, Imamiyyah jurisprudence, Hanafi jurisprudence.

The present article examines the mistake in Iranian law in the field of private law and its application with regard to the latest developments in the French legal system. One of the relationships between people is civil relations and the most significant civil relationship is contracts. The principles of mistake are one of the most important issues in contracts because if a mistake occurs in the contract, its fate may be affected. Mistakes are incorrect or inaccurate perceptions of reality in the elements of legal action that have different effects on the will. In fact, error is the error in knowing and believing the opposite of reality, despite the firm belief or strong suspicion and the correctness of thought and action, and is equivalent to the concept of compound ignorance. A mistake in French law causes absolute or relative invalidity, so that in Iranian law, a mistake is ineffective in some cases and effective in others. Based on the studies conducted, it can be concluded that the use of theories and experiences of French law should not lead to ambiguous legal writings, if some jurists have confused the concept of relative invalidity in French law with the lack of influence in Iranian law, such as Use of the word breach in Article 201 of the Civil law, which is used to express the guarantee of misconduct. Studies show that in Iranian law, a mistake never causes a lack of influence, because the lack of consent causes a lack of influence and the defect of consent causes the option to terminate, and absolute invalidity will be achieved by destroying the intention. Therefore, the duty of jurists is to establish principles that act in the direction of firmness of contracts, such as the principle of necessity and correctness, and on the other hand, guarantee performances such as invalidity, termination and non-influence that guarantee the interests of individuals in the face of these principles. Conclude in this regard.

One of the issues that has been considered in the category of sexual ‎education is the initial age of sexual influence on children. Educational ‎scientists have approached this issue with different approaches, principles, ‎and methods and are looking ‎for an answer to it. Finding an answer to this ‎question will solve this challenge of what stage of sexual education children should start with.‎ Now, the ‎main question of this study is whether, based on the jurisprudential and ‎inferential approach, it is possible to discover the age of sexual influence ‎on human beings from Qurʾānic texts and narrations and to state that ‎during this age children experience arousal‏ ‏and influence. To answer this ‎question, we have collected Qurʾānic texts and narrations related to this ‎issue through the library method and examined them under the opinions ‎of the jurists in an analytical-descriptive manner.‎

Imamiyah jurists and Iranian legal experts have divided contracts into valid and invalid in terms of their effect and often, classified the unauthorized contract under the valid contracts. Comparative studies in recent years have led to the emergence of a new circumstance as voidable contracts in Iranian law. These contracts are considered to be valid and operated by the parties but they are voidable due to reasons such as mistake, duress or operation. Referring to some articles of the Commercial Code and Sea Act, the legal experts though consider the relative refutation to be in contradiction with the general rules of contracts, have still accepted them as a necessary and new establishment in specific cases. The authors, studying the reasons of the relative nullity in common law and comparing it with similar cases in Iranian law through a descriptive-analytic method,  have concluded that there is no necessity for discussion of the voidable contracts in Iranian law, common law and Roman-German law and contrary to what is taken certain, the claimed extensions are in line with the general rules of the contracts related to the unauthorized contracts and are justified.

One of the instances of accessory of "abuse of power" is added to the instances of accessory in Article 126 of the Islamic Penal Code. The legal language refers to the "abuse of power" of official organizations and institutions, and in Iranian law, the abuse of power is a criminal offense and its implications are not explicitly stated in the law. Jurists have not been given a definitive definition of the concept of abuse of power; and what the concept and implications of the law are not precisely defined, in terms of scope and model, with concepts such as the abuse of physical, situational, financial, ideological, persuasive, persuasive Sexual and administrative have semantic affinities, although semantic affinities and its intimate relation to similar concepts are distinctive of abuses of power, with some similar concepts general and particularly absolute. The expansion of the concept of instances of abetting limits individual freedoms in society, and the importance of criminalizing "abuse of power" for the criminal defense of its victims. Therefore, the purpose is to examine the conceptual realm of abuse of power and its implications in the victimization measure. The method is descriptive-analytical. The dominant individual, the basis of power, is not only political but also a working relationship, a kinship, and so on.

In modern law, the unconscionability of contracts has become a basis for vast intervention of government in contracts law. Upon this basis, some protective rules were legislated for protection of the consumers’ rights and preventing misuse of stronger economic situations and anti-competitive actions. Although, the elements of contractual unconscionability are not as clear as it necessitates. These legal systems have pursued different approaches. The American Law has presented the general theory of the unconscionability of contracts. In some legal systems of European countries, the applicable and operative system has a special place in which precise and particular examples of the unconscionable contracts are considered. On the other hand, the Iranian law has not dealt with the elements of this case. Thus, studying various rules, one can merely achieve few of these examples. It is required for the Iranian legislator to take a certain position for stabilizing the concept of contractual unconscionability, determining the obvious regulations, elements and examples thereof.