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

The legislature for confiscation and the government seizure of property as the crime devices has not observed the principle of transparency and minimal substantive and procedural guarantees. This research with descriptive-analytic method has examined the current situation in the national laws and compared it with the laws of other systems and determines reformative policies. In the current laws not only the definite instances and criteria for the confiscation and ownership of assets have not been mentioned but also have been neglected the discourse of the expropriation based on the fictional supposition of the guilty property and with justification of the prevention of the repeated crime, the principles of necessity, the proportionality, damages, independence and impartiality of the judiciary, the identity of the party and the necessity of speeding up proceedings and the right to property has faced with major risk. As a result of the study It can be said that the evidences such as the criminal aims of the seizure of property, the fundamental characteristics of the punishment in this sanction and the legitimate possession of the owner until the commitment of the crime show that the government seizure of property as instrument of crime is financial penalty. The reformative suggestions are: the domestic legal system for the enforcement of confiscation orders, besides considering substantiative guarantees including the principle of minimizing, the principle of legality, the necessity of mens rea of the abetting offence, the individualization of the criminal liability and prohibition of inhuman punishment, it should respect the procedural criminal guarantees such as the supposition of innocent and the other defendant’s rights.

Apart from that “Possession Will” which known as unilateral or bilateral contract it accepted as returnable or revocable by testator in the statutes of the most state. But the views are different that the testator has right forfeited his returning of possession will from himself or not. In Iranian Civil Law and Imamiyeh Jurisprudence if this clause included from within will certainly unreliable. If this right forfeited concluded with from within bilateral contract some lawyers know it null because it is contrary to spiritual law and some of them knows it correct. in Egyptian Law this clause is null. In English Law because returning of possession will is counted as essential elements of will, it is order not merely right and to take consideration forfeited this right is impossible. This research to describe this right and present a comparative study with Egyptian and English Law for this respect that to earn common basis and choice view that has most conformity with parallel to statute and Imamiyeh Jurisprudence.

One of the new transformations in scope of maritime transportation in relation with shipping documents includes non-paper (electronic) shipping documents. Three main functions of bill of lading in maritime transportation comprise receipt of carriage of good, reason for carriage contract, and title document. The majority of researches are about to realize functions of carriage receipt and reason for carriage contract within substitution of electronic documents such as replacement of paper bill of lading with electronic bill of lading while there is not a same conclusion in relation with function of title document and this doubt in result is beyond the replacement of paper documents with electronic documents caused by ambiguities in considering bill of lading as title document of goods and function of bill of lading as a title document. In general, transfer of bill of lading does not mean transfer of ownership while ownership is transferred through contract of goods’ sale and bill of shading is considered as a document that indicates property of goods to facilitate transactions within commercial transactions

According to current rules and regulations in Iran, like the other executive bodies, municipalities should pay to compensate for the site and superstructure in approved urban projects to the owners. Municipalities face challenges in case of taking possession because some of the superstructures are built on the sites related to urban projects before constructing the building while the project is publicly announced, and the constructed buildings do not have construction permission. In practice, municipalities try to submit the violation case of such buildings to the court to achieve the building destruction vote issued by commissions on Article 100. Under this order, municipalities do not pay compensation for the superstructure. Accordingly, this practice will not solve the problem due to two reasons: 1- commissions may not issue the order of building demolition; 2- the problem remains unsolved in urgent cases of project implementation when the compensation of site and building is paid to the registration fund for projection and possession. It worth notifying, there are few documents about the possession in these cases in addition to the absence of rules on urban rights in Iran. Hence, the author tended to argue the case of whether paying compensation for such buildings or not. Results showed that such compensation should not be paid for in this case.

The ever-increasing expansion of urban societies and shortage of residential lands has caused to be aboveground and underground more valuable than the ground in some cases. This has led to the increasing conflict between individual and public ownership. Studying and analyzing the principles of ownership can reduce to a large extent the conflict between the private owners and custodians of urban affairs. the results of comparing the fundamentals of this type of ownership in Islamic, Iranian law and legal system of property rights in France, England, Germany, Switzerland, Egypt implies that the Controlling(Al-Taslit), Reverence(Ehteram), Compliance (Tabaiiat), Possession(Yad) and No-harm(La-Zarar) Rules are the most foundations of aboveground and underground property right. Hence the owner of the land has Possession power on them and this must be honored, as aboveground and underground are land accessories and any person who prevents legal possession of the owner, will be liable to compensate due to the damages.

The alleged abuse or wastage of the trustee، you should trust him more opportunity to benefit from the fruits of Responsibility boiled and trust you، he will not Yray. To Therefore، to the trustee of the trust property is being infringed، or wastage، by denying him civil penalty of Obligation of Trust and transportation will be legitimate and justified. But what about the need to pay is contemplated that if Amin was regretful of his guilt، and victimization and on the other hand، does the former waste reduction، and again attempted to hold the trust property to the trustee، the rule can be punished for Civil she was there for him to trust you? According to law، civil law does not provide an answer to this question، and talk of iodine status among the faithful after the fault has not? In terms of jurisprudence، which Fqhayy have any pictures of this discussion، the comments are elected In a conventional classification، their views on this issue are summarized in vision is، Other collective group and not return back Ydamany are preferred. They also adopt a middle way in the back where you do not trust and believe in others return to trust you. Th apex of the fault are Been attempted in this paper، we proposed opinion analysis division delivers innovative in this area is additionally a good approach، especially in regard to force you trust، the trustee apex of the fault is present.

Today “the sale of future goods” in the local and international business has been mostly common. In this type of sale, goods do not exist at the moment of concluding the agreement. Rather, they will happen in the future. In this article we will investigate the veracity of the sale of future goods in Iran and Islamic law. Besides, the different types of such sales as well as the process of the possession transaction will be discussed. The two main questions posed in this article are as follows: 1- Among different types of goods inserted in the provision 350 of the civil law which ones are the goods in the sale of future goods? 2- Considering the sale of future goods, when does the possession transaction happen?