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

Since the protection of the plaintiff and the victim is the protection of public order and the creation of security for all members of a society, it can be seen that the lack of proper implementation of criminal law by the judiciary, and other enforcers of these laws, sometimes the plaintiff to file a lawsuit. Has renounced himself or has personally taken revenge, in which the plaintiff himself is also guilty and accused, by studying the criminal law while observing the principle of equality of arms. ”The criminal legislator pays attention to the plaintiff and the victim of the crime. Put your agenda. However, due to many problems of executive and legislative institutions such as legal and irresponsible dismissals, lack of time, executive facilities, study and training opportunities, as well as the large number of work and lack of judicial and administrative staff have not been able to implement it properly and adequately. This discouragement of the plaintiff in pursuing his rights has not only led to pessimism in the judiciary, but also to the perpetrators and insecurity. The majority of plaintiffs' supporters believe that the criminal victim should be supported and assisted by the government and civil society. Provide assistance and services to him to do their best so that the victim in the pre-criminal and post-criminal situation can benefit from this support.

The situation of Iran’s legal system is ambiguous and controversial about who can be prosecuted for detrimental crimes to public morality (crimes against morality) and in other words, who are considered victims in such crimes. However, a victim is a person who has suffered losses directly and conventionally (customarily), and the person who is in the opposite side of the act against public morality and chastity is the direct victim of the crime in detrimental crimes to public morality. Therefore, the complaints of other persons, except those which the legislator has added them to the complainant, are not allowed to initiate prosecutions. Furthermore, the opposite party of detrimental acts to public morality (with incompatible with chastity, crimes against morality) is not guilty in all cases, and the victim is not considered to be the one who suffers the loss, if the he/she has real consent to the commitment of a crime, but if consent is made by threats, deception and so on, and in a way that the person is conventionally considered to be the victim of loss and damage, even if the person has a criminal intent (mens rea), the plaintiff's sentences will be imposed on him/her and his/her complaint can be processed. The present article is going to answer this basic question in two general topics: Which person or persons are considered victims in detrimental crimes to public morality (crimes against morality), and as a result, their complaint can lead to the initiation and continuation of criminal proceedings.

When the government, with all its forces along with civil society, is taking part in a collaborative criminal policy in support of the victim, it is portrayed as an inclusive and desirable pattern of social support. Social support works more than anything else through community-based activities. These supports from Non-Governmental Organizations can be divided into two categories: First, medical-social support that is provided to victimized children, and second, legal protection of them. From the perspective of criminology, children and adolescents must be supported and paid special attention to them, due to the special circumstances that govern them. In the meantime, there is a question that, according to Section 66 of the Criminal Procedure Act, are the NGOs only declaring a crime or can they be the paintiff? In this study, while describing social-medical and legal support, with the reasoning behind the answer to the above question, it was concluded that the vague and interpretable appearance of Section 66 as a statment was in fact that the NGOs are the plaintiff of the crimes committed in the field of regulations of this article.

When the rights of the defendant are violated or denied. The plaintiff, in order to oblige the defendant to return the right or to accept it, resorts to a lawsuit that ethics requires that the defendant's right not be violated as a result of any unsupported lawsuit. The legislator, in order to provide legal and moral protection and to protect the rights of the defendant, and in case the plaintiff is sentenced to injustice, can receive damages resulting from the plaintiff's lawsuit or execution of the sentence. For this purpose, it has been predicted to obtain security. The purpose of this article is to examine the cases of obtaining security from the plaintiff in civil lawsuits. In this article, it has been prepared and compiled using descriptive-analytical method using library methods and using library resources. The findings indicate that; The legislature has proposed an establishment in the Code of Civil Procedure so that the defendant can seize the equivalent of the damages from the property of the plaintiff. This establishment can be described as obtaining security. In addition, these findings of the research show that the possibility of obtaining security from the applicant requires taking the conditions set by the legislator. The security institution is intended for cases in which in the future, due to a lawsuit filed by the defendant, the defendant will not be deprived of his right, and moral teachings emphasize the legislator's protection of the defendant in similar cases. The defendant in the lawsuit, in cases such as fictitious lawsuits and lawsuits of foreign nationals, and in the reviewing authorities of the lawsuit, including the first instance, appeal, appeal, third party objection and retrial, will be obtained from the defendant at the defendant's request. The security institution is intended for cases in which in the future, due to a lawsuit filed by the defendant, the defendant will not be deprived of his right, and moral teachings emphasize the legislator's protection of the defendant in similar cases. The defendant in the lawsuit, in cases such as fictitious lawsuits and lawsuits of foreign nationals, and in the reviewing authorities of the lawsuit, including the first instance, appeal, appeal, third party objection and retrial, will be obtained from the defendant at the defendant's request.

In Islamic jurisprudence, jurists have provided criteria and cited various legal rules and principles in order to determine the applicant. The reason for the jurists for this distinction is that they can determine the burden of proving the dispute to the recipient. However, it is not always the case that he wants to be the only active member during the proceedings. Sometimes this view is accompanied by changes such as the judge's involvement in proving the case. Because civil litigation systems are subdivided into different legal systems, the role of the court in each legal system is different. Thus, in the system of accusatory proceedings, civil litigation is the property of the litigants and the judge is merely a passive member who can have no role other than issuing a verdict based on the reasons presented by the parties. However, in the system of investigative proceedings, the role of the judge in proving the lawsuit is active and he can search for evidence to prove the lawsuit in parallel with the plaintiff. In a way, the activeness of the judge reduces the role of the plaintiff in carrying the burden of proof. In this article, the basics of the role of the judge in proving the case are evaluated.

Bring an action is with the petitioner, therefore determining the title of action is dependent on the decision of plaintiff. The legislator has not, except in exceptional cases, chosen the mandatory titles for civil actions and has assigned the choice of title of action to the plaintiff due to the unlimited examples of civil actions and because of the base and nature of action. Therefore, the prosecutors are required to recognize the decision of the plaintiff to name their action. However, the title of the plaintiff is different from the one that is common for action or the legislator has used. In fact, the principle is on the authority of plaintiff to determine the title of a civil action unless the legislator itself specifies the elements and the title of the action, in which case the elective title of the legislator is mandatory. The principle of mastery of parties on the thematic directions of action and the principle of hearing action confirms the authority of plaintiff in determining civil action. In this article, the existence of this principle in the civil proceedings is investigated and confirmed.

According to narrations, consensus of foqaha and legal texts, the oath of the defendant in court, if done with the request of the plaintiff and the permission of the judge, as long as it has not been refuted by the defendant or the judge, has external and internal effects such as the peremptory termination of the plaintiff's action, extinction of the right of retribution, the extinction of the right of demand, and so on. Of course, these effects appear when the oath is true and enjoys all the requirements, but the false oath, in addition to the afterlife punishment and legal punishment for the oath, does not create any change in the fact and the position of proof, and the defendant is still under an obligation and indebted and obliged to pay the debt, and the property is in possession of the right holder. There are four possibilities proposed as to whether the main cause is the oath itself, the permission or ruling of the judge; the strongest of these is the probability based on which, effects are the judged property that is issued on the basis of the oath, or in other words, an oath can be effective that the rule of judge as a concurrent condition goes with it.

The media play an important role in responding to crime at different stages of criminal prosecution. The legislator's initiative in Article 96 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, A clear indication of the activities of mass media in the preliminary research phase. According to this regulation, media with the release of the accused person's identity, Have a significant role in advancing the preliminary research process. In fact, with the escape of the accused, the proceedings of the prosecutor's office were stopped and the publication of the specification and finding it again flowed out. On the other hand, with the media being the defendant's identity, he has been convicted of numerous offenses, the offenders will have the opportunity to lodge a lawsuit to prosecute him. Of course, the legislator, in view of the disadvantages of this operation, limits the media to the accused's identity and is subject to a series of legal rules. The purpose of this paper is to while explaining the functions and objections of the media to the identity of the accused at the research stage, studying these criteria is to prevent any irregularities. The methodology of this research is descriptive-analytical-critical and has been used with genuine library resources. According to research theoretical studies, Insert the accused's profile in the media has a judicial nature and it is necessary "The Executive Order of the Mode of Dissemination of the Identity of the Defendant" Which includes such things as Media allowed to publish identity, Number of ads published and… is developed by experts.

The present article aims to examine if iqamah bayyenah[1] by the plaintiff is the "right" or "obligation", and by using qualitative content analysis method tries to expresses the existing statements in this regard. One of the evident testimonies that the plaintiff can present during the hearing of his claim in court is evidence. There is a difference of opinion among the Imami foqaha (jurists) as to whether following the denial of the defendant the ruler can oblige the plaintiff to declare the evidence in court if there is evidence. Some foqaha believe that it is not permissible for the ruler to impose an obligation because they consider the declaration of evidence as the plaintiff's right. However, some others consider it permissible and believe that if the ruler orders, the plaintiff is obliged to present evidence in court. Finally, some other foqaha have a different view and distinguish between knowledge and ignorance of the plaintiff to adduce evidence. The present article, by proving that the ruler cannot compel the plaintiff to present evidence in court, expresses the statements and reasons in this regard.

From several decades ago the legislator nationalizes all the land and building of the jungle lands and grasslands because of the enforcement of sovereign. Therefore, those kinds of lands because of being recognized as jungle or grassland were called national lands. Following the act of legislator, a lawsuit under the title of lawsuit objection to the recognition of national land was formed in our legal system which enjoys special complexity because of the multiplicity of plaintiffs and defendants. Accordingly, having given a description of national land and explaining its aspects the present essay along with element of relief has reckoned and considered the plaintiffs of lawsuit in five groups (Land owners, garden and installment owners, public legal personality, farmers owning nasaqi lands and non-governmental organization) and the defendants in three groups (Natural resources of city offices, land owners and garden and installment owners and farmers owning nasaqi land and housing and urban development organization).

The Locus standi means having right to bring the legal action before the court. The doctrine of Locus standi restricts the access of citizens to justice. This access is a key principle in the different legal systems and several criteria used by court to obtain Locus standi of plaintiff. The fundamental question is this: can be in environmental lawsuits, citizens and non-governmental organizations attempted to the fight against contaminating or destructive environment, especially when you do not have the direct and personal benefit? Today, around the world the possibility of litigation on the basis of common interests (distinct from the issue of collective interest), not only in developed countries but also in the industrial and developing world have been provided in this area as well.

Human rights defined as a complex of rights and privileges which apart from any kind of discriminations are recognized for the human being. The necessity of public and particular protection of human being needs widespread effort of international society, states, and non-governmental organizations. The public protection is in regard to general population, whereas the particular one refers to special groups or the owner of special titles. Plaintiff and defendant as the outstanding samples of these titles need particular protection for their vulnerability. The attitude of the present discussion is to state kinds of plaintiff and defendant rights in the human rights instruments stressing on the European Court of Human Rights Precedents. The outcomes of the research indicate the gradual promotion in international system of human rights with regard to plaintiff and defendant rights.

Nowadays, the participation of non-governmental organizations are considered as a one of a good elements of the governance from the economic, social and cultural points of view. The mentioned participation in legal system can play a prominent role in the efficiency and public confidence. The new criminal procedure law aiming at operationalizing the above objectives, has officially recognized the Pursuing the Public Action in a special category of crimes by these organizations. Although the position of these organizations has been cited in the text of law as a “crime reporter”, extensive authorities such as presenting an evidence and protesting to an award which was made have been granted to them. In fact, the law -due to discretionary spending in this arearefused to name them as a “plaintiff ". Probably, due to the predicted authority, the law considered an "intermediate" role between plaintiff and crime reporter. In some cases in which a crime has a specific victim, the consent of victim or his/her legal guardian is necessary and required. The matter which has been neglected in the law is the mechanism of supervision for the activities of these organizations. I hope it becomes possible to clarify the failures of this law by its implementation and then take the better step under the light of the experiences.

The air transportation system as a basic method in the domain of international communications and exchanges has an important role and position and due to its expedition it has a special significance particularly in passenger transportation sector. Due to the domination of its international aspect, this method of transportation is subject to the international rules more than other means of transportation to the extent the domestic air transportation of certain countries such as Iran follows the related conventions like the Warsaw Convention. One of the important issues in the legal discussion in this domain is the identification of the beneficiaries and holders of the right of filing petitions to demand compensation (plaintiff) on the one side and determination of this fact that against which respondents- the persons who have sustained losses and have the right of filing petition- may do so to demand compensation on the basis of the liabilities stipulated in the Warsaw Convention and the amendments thereof. Moreover, appointment of the competent courts to review these petitions is also an important issue in this respect. The present article discusses these three issues based on the 1929 Warsaw Convention, The Hague Protocol of 28 September 1955, Guadalajara Convention of 18 September 1961 and Guatemala Protocol of 8 March 1971.

The pleas introduced to a claim are one of the important topics of the civil proceedings, which have been provided by the legislator in articles 84 onward of the civil procedure regulations in Iran. Whereas a plea to a claim as a procedural issue often prevents investigation of the court into the nature of the claim and issuance of a court order, and such cases are ultimately sent to the record-room by a writ of rejection of the suit, attention to this issue and effort to file a suit without a plea for the petitioner is of special importance. One of the most important pleas is the plea of non-establishment of position of petitioner. The reason of introducing such a plea is the possibility of filing a suit with the court on behalf of the plaintiff under the titles of advocacy, guardianship, tutorship and so on. That is why the petitioner should pay particular attention to the documents revealing his (her) representation in filing a suit on behalf of the plaintiff in order to prevent this plea from consideration by the court.The old regulations of civil procedure considered the non-attachment of the documents concerning the position of the petitioner (to establish his (her) claimed position) to the petition as a deficiency of the petition therefore, office of the courts of first instance and courts of appeal warned the primary plaintiff to remove this defect, failing to do so the office had no way by to issue a writ of rejection of the petition or the initial claim. However, in the new regulations of civil procedure the courts (particularly courts of appeal) have not been obliged to review the issue and to notify the removal of the defect, consequently, this defect in the first instance prevents a court order and causes the issuance of a writ of rejection of the suit while the court of appeal too, may reject a primary order (issued in favor of the petitioner) and issue an irrevocable writ of rejection due to the non-establishment of the position of the petitioner. These decisions by the courts made without any prior notification to the petitioner to possibly remove the defect seem illogical and unfair. The present paper deals with a research on a plea of non-establishment of position and its contrast in the old and new regulations of civil procedure and finally, puts forth some suggestions for compensation of the deficiency of the new regulations of civil procedure until their eventual amendment and completion.