Relief and compensation for litigation costs in Iranian and British law

Participating in a lawsuit involves costs for the parties involved, including the court, the plaintiff and the defendant, and the legal system governing these costs plays an important role in achieving civil justice. A comparative study of the provisions governing the provision and compensation of legal damages in the law of Iran and the United Kingdom better shows the shortcomings of the current Iranian laws in this field and is effective in correcting them.   

The present research has been compiled in a descriptive-analytical manner with a comparative view of various documentary sources and studies in Iranian and British law.  

The legislature, in order to guarantee possible damages, has made it possible for the plaintiff to cover his costs, which, in view of the lack of a proper mechanism for forecasting the duration and quality of proceedings and estimating costs, is a shortcoming compared to a similar institution in English law. ‌ There are some. Also, in order to compensate for definitive damages resulting from court costs and other court damages, following the rule of "post-event costs", damages have been transferred so that no damages remain without compensation. However, in Iranian law, unlike in the United Kingdom, not giving the judge the power to review the circumstances of the case and the litigants, in addition to the possibility of abuse of the institution of fictitious litigation, also leaves the door open to abuse the right to sue and these shortcomings The unwillingness of the defendants to settle their dispute out of court and the abandonment of the principle of good faith in our judicial system is crystallized.