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

The rule of waste is one of the famous jurisprudential rules in all Muslim Sects and there is a consensus regarding it. One of the most important causes of forced guarantee that is cited is the same rule of loss. The application of the rule of waste indicates that whoever wastes another`s property is a guarantor , and the mistake in the loss is not stated in the appearance of the rule , and on the ofter hand , if the non-financial rights of people are lost , it con not be removed from the rule. Because the appearance of the rule emphasizes the of financial rights. However, one should not pay attention to appearance of the rule, because by using Article 1 of the Civil Liability Law, harming any right that a person has , whether it is property or otherwise , is guaranteed. One of the non-financial human rights is life and health , wiche is respected by the legislator along with other legal rights, including property. Therefore, despite the fact that Physical loss and damage to people is not a matter of financial rights, but according to Article 496 of the Islamic Penal Code, it is a guarantee and responsibility for the person responsible for the damage.

Misunderstanding of reality and belief that something is right, wrong or vice versa is called mistake. Understanding the concept of wrong is not possible simply, because the meaning of right and wrong is relative and temporary. However, what as a mistake requires the performance guarantee, is the event that the belief of the contracting party is not in accordance with the reality. As a result, the mistake in the legal system of Iran and France distorts the will, not the subject of the contract. In Iranian Law, a mistake is sometimes a flaw in the intention and sometimes a flaw in the intention. Based on this, the performance guarantee considered by the legislator is null and void, respectively and in other cases, according to the principle of firmness of contracts, no executive guarantee has been considered for it. In French Law, it sometimes invalidates the will and sometimes impairs it, and in other cases it does not affect the validity of the contract; Based on this, mistakes are divided into obstacles, effective and ineffective, and the guarantee of its implementation is absolute, relative, and in some cases, creating the right of cancellation; An ineffective mistake does not disrupt the contract. The purpose of this article is to explain the nature and position of the mistake by applying the descriptive-analytical method and with a comparative look at the French legal system, and to study its effects in order to provide a suitable solution to solve complex problems that usually occupy the courts of law.

Undue performance is a legal evident that cused civil liability of receiver. in the civil law, some objects about undue performance have been emerged and its executive guarantee has been expressed in the case of performing undue performance circumstances. The reason of being legal evident of undue performance is that after performing undue performance receiver’s necessity and legal commitment of the restitution of property arising from legal judgement. In the realm of social security, undue performance resulted from following headings of compension, costs of treatment, pension payment, social security taxes and its appurtenances. Nevertheless, neither of social security articles has pointed to the undue performance, but from the meaning of articles 36, 37, 38,65 and 66 the above mentioned, undue performance can be inferred and considered as instances of undue performance. Undue performance may be the result of making mistake in judgement or matter by social security organization, employer, alienee or workshop interests. In social security article, mistake has not been mentioned. But inferred from 37th article above mentioned, it can be said that organization realization in determining social security taxes can be proved as a mistake.

Judgment in the Iranian law will be civil if the perpetrator commits a mistake or unconventional negligence by refusing to hear the case, but if he makes a mistake, he will be responsible for compensating the government. Recruiting an analytical-descriptive design, the study is aimed at clarifying the commonalities and differences between Imamiyyah jurisprudence and the common law system in this regard. Findings indicate that in addition to Article 171 of the Constitution, the State of the Islamic Republic of Iran recognizes relative immunity under the influence of Imamiyyah jurisprudence in order to protect the independence of the judge. They knew absolutely. In general, by anticipating the principles of ethics to monitor the misconduct of the judiciary along with appealing their decision to the extent that the US government believes in the principle of "exercise of sovereignty" is derived from the federal system, refrain from making decisions in the US. He was acquitted and the judiciary in this country, by insuring itself, found a certain limit for possible problems.

One of the specific rulings of Imāmiyya jurisprudence on Hajj and Umrah is the requirement of performing Ṭawāf al-Nisāʾ; and completing all rituals and ceremonies, including Ṭawāf al-Nisāʾ- the pilgrim leaves the iḥrām status. Although most prohibited items of iḥrām are made permissible by shaving head for Hajj or Umrah pilgrim, according to imāmiyya jurists, he must hold off on doing some prohibited items of iḥrām until the end of Ṭawāf al-Nisāʾ. As a result, performing Ṭawāf al-Nisāʾ is crucial to leave the iḥrām status. This research analyzed the positive and imperative rules of ignoring Ṭawāf al-Nisāʾ due to mistake or ignorance, depending on numerous accurate narrations validated in terms of documents and evidence. The findings of this library-based research, supported by software, confirm that in the case of abandonment because of ignorance (culpable ignorance) or mistake, expiation is not required; instead, the pilgrim is required to perform the missed Ṭawāf. This compensation varies according to the pilgrim’s power; if he has the power and feasibility of performing, he should do it; otherwise, he should appoint an agent to do it on his behalf.

The current study aims to present a typology of alignment of the employee mistakes types’ and learning from them with the internal marketing approach. The authors review the literature and in-depth overview of the theoretical foundations in the area of employees' mistakes and how to learn from them with an internal marketing approach in organizations. And then, based on the mutual orientation of the internal marketing matrix and combining it with employee mistakes typologies have achieved an analytical framework. Finally, the Delphi method has been used to inform the opinions of the experts to measure the correctness of the framework. Experts who were human resource experts and scholars were selected by the Purposive sampling method. The findings showed that stretch and sloppy mistakes are in line with transactional marketing methods, in such a way that stretch mistakes with energising and sloppy mistakes are associated with code-breaking. On the other side, the aha-moment and high-stakes mistakes are in line with relational marketing methods, in such a way that there are aha-moment of diffusing and the high-stakes mistakes with authorising. Considering the findings of the consensus of the experts, it can be concluded that there is an alignment between different types of employee mistakes and internal marketing approaches.Introduction Employee mistakes should not be observed as events to be disregarded or unseen but as chances for creative learning. Such a direction is viewed to positively affect learning and act of and inside organizations (Harteis et al., 2008). According to the review of existing literature on people's mistakes and their role in the domestic market, it has been determined. Therefore, in this research, we try to strengthen the literature in this field. The aim of the current research is a typology of mistakes by examining internal issues. In the following, the theoretical literature of the research was carefully described, and the background of the research was made by examining the most up-to-date research and internal research related to the current research topic from reliable databases. Then, the current research methodology is discussed, and the findings and conclusions are presented. The research's main question is: Is there alignment between the types of mistakes of employees and internal stakeholders?  Literature ReviewEmployee mistakes Palmer et al. (2010) describe a mistake as "actions of oversight or commission by individuals or groups of individuals, performance in their organization functions, that create surprising harmful consequences with an included social cost." Like this, employee mistakes can damage organizational performance (Naveh et al., 2015; Palmer et al., 2010).  2.1.1. Learning from MistakesMistakes are frequently recognized as an annoying side effect of human learning, though they can be a valuable experience resource empowering learning if acknowledged. We cannot learn from mistakes if we do not agree to take them (Kucharska, 2021). 2.1.1.1. Mistake ToleranceWhile organizations take success as confirmation of current organizational knowl-edge, defeats, and errors call it into question (Weinzimmer & Esken, 2017). Internal MarketingTo et al. (2015) described internal marketing as "observing employees as internal clients, seeing jobs as internal goods that satisfy the needs and wants of these clients while dealing with the organization's purposes."  MethodologyThe current research method is one of the survey methods, the Delphi. Delphi is a systematic method or approach in research to collect opinions from a group of experts on a topic or a question.ResultsAccording to the results obtained from the literature review and the consensus of the experts, it was found that stretching and sloppy mistakes are aligned with transactional marketing methods; in this way, stretching mistakes are aligned with energetic learning and sloppy mistakes with decoding learning. On the other hand, it was found that momentary and risky mistakes are aligned with relational marketing methods; In this way, momentary mistakes are aligned with distributed learning, and high-risk mistakes with empowerment-based learning. These cases are summarized in the table below . Discussion A learning-centric culture of mistakes tolerance might not rise in those organizations which induce staff to shirk or even hide errors. In order to finally start a learning procedure, the acting individual has to experience concern for the event. Many events are considered errors (Harteis et al., 2008). Alsinnovativeart learning from errors is one of the important belongings of innovative organizations (Khorakian & Jahangir, 2018). In the present research, the Delphi working group was held in two rounds to reach a consensus. In the first round, the respondents scored the items based on their agreement or disagreement with them, and in the second round, they revised their opinion based on the average of the opinions of the first round. The results of the experts' consensus at the end of the second round are reported below.Conclusion According to the consensus of experts, there is an alignment between different types of employee mistakes and internal marketing. Based on the results, it is suggested that organizations use the internal marketing approach to allow their employees to make mistakes and welcome their mistakes by creating a culture of acceptance of mistakes and by using relational and transactional internal marketing methods (according to the type of mistake) Creating a space to facilitate learning from mistakes.Discussion and Resultswe identified and prioritized the consequences of BD in 7 major Category including: 1-process 2-people 3-product 4-physical evidence 5-promotion 6-place 7-price. And Challenges of BD in 4 Category including: 1- Ethical and privacy issues 2- Management and financial issues 3- Technological, human and organizational challenges 4- Data reliability and data accessConclusionsOn the demand side, there has been a massive transformation in consumer behaviour. Consumers have become more experienced, independent and irrational due to changes in their values, lifestyles and demographic patterns. This has forced the supply side to shift from mass marketing to personalized marketing through the rules of market segmentation. The production process has also become more consumer centric. Furthermore, as a sign of a new era in ICTs, concepts such as big data, IoT and AI have recently gained significant importance in many sectors because the developments in ICTs have accelerated worldwide. Tourism is one of the important fields that use these concepts and will also be influenced to a great extent. Such changes will occur in the “P”s of tourism and hospitality marketing on the supply side and consumer behaviour on the demand side. As for the retransformation of tourism and hospitality marketing, new forms of “P”s can be explained as below: First, tourism products and services will be redesigned with the help of ICTs. Products and services will become more destination-oriented and smart destinations will be the core of tourism products and services. Second, the ability to use information technology and develop more technology-oriented products and services will be an indicator of pricing and value. Third, the place where all purchasing and transactions to be handled will become much more virtual. Finally, the promotion will also be more virtual-centric, where consumer decision-making can be influenced by the experience of other consumer peers and more personalized communication channels will be part of online or virtual marketing.

The issue of mistake in crime has often been a point of contention between jurists and criminologists in criminal law and criminology. A secondary issue of crimes’ psychological element is the occurrence of a mistake by perpetrators. In law, a mistake is generally a misconception a person has on a subject and does actions making them committed. Perhaps, if he had been aware of this in the beginning, his will and determination would never have been placed on committing such acts. However, in the process of committing a crime, mistakes may occur that ultimately affect the degree of criminal responsibility on the part of a perpetrator. Criminal justice calls for a distinction between those committing a crime with malice and criminal ill will and those committing a crime through a mistake/negligence without intending to violate the sanctity of the law and its effects, being a crime in the law. By adopting an analytical and descriptive method, the present study aims at investigating the effect of mistake in crimes from the perspective of criminology and criminal law.

The civil liability of the government and its employees is a relatively new idea that has created a variety of topics. Considering the importance of the position of judgment and its impact on the interests of individuals, judge error can be one of the most important instances of error of government employee.

It is descriptive study.
Ethical Considerations: All ethical considerations have been observed.

The judge's mistake can be divided for a variety of reasons, and its origin can also be the judge's ignorance or his misinterpretation of legal texts.

In any case where a person is forced to compensate for other compensation, he or she has civil liability. Therefore, these interpretations can also be attributed to the judge's performance and the works that follow his judgment. The damages caused to individuals by the judge's ruling are an example of the judge's mistake. If the damages are not due to the judge's mistake and are related to the court's instruments, the government is responsible for the compensation.

Preparing a formal transaction document is one of the specific duties of notaries public, which requires the use and observance of various substantive and formal conditions. Failure to comply with any of these conditions can lead to the annulment of the document by the court and the responsibility to compensate the clerks. Compensation by the clerks in various articles such as Article 68 of the Registration Law (1310), Article 22 of the Law on Notaries Officially in particular and Articles 328 to 335 of the Civil Code in general. In the meantime, compensation for damages caused by mistakes and forgeries in the preparation of official documents, in addition to legal principles, also has moral principles. In other words, even before the formation of governments, the grounds for compensation are seen in human behavior, and this proves that compensation has a moral basis beyond the legal framework. In this article, according to the descriptive-analytical method, we have dealt with the issue of what are the ethical principles of compensation for damages caused by mistakes and forgeries in the preparation of official documents?

The result of the present study is that principles such as good faith, fidelity to the covenant, prohibition of fraud, etc. are considered as moral principles of compensation for mistakes and forgeries in the preparation of official documents. The solution presented here is that if the injured person has been harmed as a result of a mistake in these cases, the compensation solution can be considered from the place of collection right or, in general, collection government rights.

Infallibility is one of the important characteristics of the divine prophet and caliph, and there are differences between theorists in its scope or scope. The Prophet is necessarily qualified with infallibility in order to guarantee the accurate and correct delivery of divine messages to human beings. Therefore, the question of this research is whether the limits of this infallibility extend to the ordinary affairs of life or their governing and social affairs? The Prophet of Islam consulted with the companions in the administration of his government and sometimes accepted the opinions of the companions. Since the companions did not have infallibility, can such decisions be considered infallible? The research method is descriptive-analytical and based on library resources. The findings of the research show that the occurrence of inadvertence in social and political affairs should not be compared with individual affairs, the Prophet according to the existing conditions after consulting with the companions chose the best solution.

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.

A mistake in the contract is a misconception of the parties or one of them about one of the elements of the contract. In the civil codes, Mistake nature and condition is usually described as a part of intention and consent title. Following the amendments in the French Civil Law (Contracts Law section) in 2016, the Mistake regulations were changed. This transformation was significant because Napoleon's code articles remained intact over the past two centuries, and interpretations by courts and lawyers in this regard have led to the formation of a different approach to the Code texts in the Mistake section; According to Articles 1130 to 1136, and then 1139 and 1144, the mistake rules are relatively more detailed than in the past. Innovative topics Such as descriptions of the circumstance that is a ground for nullity clarified of essential qualities in a contract, mistake in the subject or the law, also in the subject and the contractual person, a mistake in the motivation and mistakes caused by the fraud. Some kind of neutral errors such as mistakes in the evaluation and motivation are mentioned. The French Civil Code (1804) is the most important source of adaptation of Iranian civil law in the general rules of contracts; therefore, any review in this section can be effective in providing new interpretations for Iranian code and inspiring its reform. In this article, an effort has been made to provide a relatively accurate analysis of the current Mistake theory of French civil law.

One of the conditions for concluding contracts in Shia jurisprudence and Iranian law, like other legal systems, is the necessity of coincidence between offer and acceptance. The non-conformity of these two wills, as to the subject or the main conditions of each contract, is a cause of invalidity. "Mistake" is not only the most important cause but also the only cause of mismatch between offer and acceptance. In spite of this and importance of both issues that is "Coincidence between offer and acceptance" and "mistake, so far we do not have independent and serious discussions about the relationship between them, neither in jurisprudence nor in the law and in general rules of contracts. This research, relying on the precise explanation of these two issues and exploring them in different legal angles and with the aim of providing a new explanation of these concepts, emphasizes that »mistake is not only one of the most important defects of will, but also only vice of agreement and only cause of mismatch of two wills (offer and acceptance) in Iranian law«. This new and different explanation of mistake as a »Vice of Agreement« has several achievements. Systemizing the »theory of Mistake« and expanding its scope, regulating the rulings of the necessity of coincidence between offer and acceptance, finding a new basis for justifying many differences between the three legal systems of Iran, France and the United Kingdom as to these issues, are of achievements of this research.

Owing to the importance of the position of adjudication, the judges have a sort of immunity in most legal systems in order not to be under pressure, to feel comfortable in issuance of judgment, and concentrate on finding the facts and laws of the cases submitted. However, due to some factors, judge's decision may cause material or moral damage to one of the parties in which case the impossibility of compensation is contrary to fairness and justice. But whether sue must be against the state or the judge is controversial. This study that is written through a descriptive-analytic method and by employing a library-based approached, aims at settling this problem. In the French law, the damages initially are compensated by the government, and the government has the right to refer to him if the damages are caused by the intentional or heavy fault of the judge. In Iran’s law, in the intentional or grave fault or unforgivable mistake of the judge the lawsuit is conducted against him and otherwise, would be against the state. While, the new Code of Criminal Procedure enacted in 1392/2013 as regards the damage arising from an imprisonment resulted in acquittal has followed the same method which is enforced in French law and other advanced systems according to which the state is responsible for compensating the injured and meanwhile, the right of the state to refer to the blameworthy judge is reserved that ensures the rights of the injured. Therefore, extension of this statement to cases where the fault or the mistake of the judge causes the material and moral loss to the parties, will advance the justice and increasingly secure the rights of the aggrieved party.

Unauthorized transaction occurs when a person transacts others’ property without having the following criteria: guardianship, executorship, attorneyship, tutorship or obligation of the other or property which belongs to the right of other and this transaction will be unenforceable. The legal nature of unauthorized transaction is a legal act. But regarding the legal nature of permission or refusal of unauthorized transaction that is performed on behalf of the owner or the other, there is difference of opinion. By performing data analyses, the nature of permission or refusal is a legal evident. After performing unauthorized transaction, the owner has authority to permit or refuse transaction in order to determine its circumstance. In fact, the consent or refusal of the owner of a property to an unauthorized contract can be signified by an act which signifies his consent or indicates absence of consent to the contract. Such consent is only effective and valid if it has not been previously refused; otherwise, it is not effective. The owner may make a mistake in refusing or permitting transaction. This mistake is sometime effective and sometimes ineffective. In this article, while expressing the meaning and nature of permission and refusal, the legal effects of mistake on permission and refusal are investigated.

The most problematic verse of Hafez is the famous: "Our Master said . . ." The author of this article first attempts to classify different interpretations related to this verse, and believes that most of these interpretations are the beliefs of their writers which are originated from studies of Islamic mysticism and Hafez' poetry or other mystic poets. Some interpreters have criticized the views of others from a rhetorical and poetic point of view. The main question of this article is to seek the Quranic sources for the aspect of humor and irony in the “Verse” through finding a document in the Quran that proves that Hafez' master is also in a position to make a mistake. The document exists in the Quran (27:88) that if the master sees a fault and says it is not, in fact, he concealed the fault and it is a humor. The second phase of the humor is where the Arabic word for “Sone’” (Creation) has an implied meaning of "goodness" in Arabic dictionaries. So, the Master's work is about the “Good Creator's” pen, not the absolute pen. In this case, the Master's concealment of the fault can be described as conscious, educative, and optimistic. Another aspect of the research is the completion of Jalal Dawani's meaning which says: the fate and destiny's pen does not make a mistake. This argument has been proved and supported through the denotative meaning of the terms “right” and “mistake”, “fulfillment” and “unfulfillment” and the meaning of the fulfillment of the Fate's pen equals “God's will is fulfilled”.

In executing of legal punishment such as cutting of hand or leg, it is probable to cut the opposite organ, by mistake, intentionally or by beneficence. In this case, the punishment of cutting is left, in view of famous theory in jurisprudence, contrary to another one. Although the in both opinion the pay of blood money is necessary, in supposition of intention of mistake and retaliation in supposition of mistake. In view of this article, by analysis of foundations, the view of un famous jurists ( revocation of legal punishments) is seem to correct, in both supposition of mistake and intention, and conformable to traditions that says it should be remain one hand and leg to offender, to accomplish basic and daily  Affairs. But this theory is reviewable, in conviction of executioner to retaliation or to pay blood money, because of contrariety with traditions, rule of Beneficence it will be in the interest of offender. (revocation of punishment, on one hand, and the right of demand of retaliation or receipt of blood money, on the other hand.) In opinion of authors, the equable way is that we say to revocation in both of intention and mistake, and at the same time we accept some proportional deterrent punishment (Taazir), in case of intention.

The necessity of compliance of creation and acceptance and its effect on the credential realization of contract is one of the conditions that Imamite jurisprudents emphasize as a principle whose violation may cause the contract to become void in certain cases or no contract may substantially materialize in the arena of validity. However, it seems that in some cases such as some referents of minor significance in the contract, in some cases, this rule is not followed due to the need to maintain the contractual and social order as well as firmness of the deals and a mistake in the contract causes the creation of the right to terminate and even in some cases the occurrence of mistake does not affect the fate of the contract. This approach is also interpreted to substantiate the theory of apparent sovereign will or the adequacy of the apparent will is also interpreted in the law of some Western countries, including Germany, within the scope of contracts, and is recognized as a strategy for the necessity of contracts and the avoidance of shakiness of contracts. A strategy that, of course, is also understood from the statements of some contemporary jurisprudents, including Imam Khomeini, about the nature of the contract and the role of creation and acceptance in its realization.