Unjustifiable arrest and imprisonment includes illegal and false arrest. Most prisoners sustain financial losses because of prevention of working. But most Jurists do not guarantee financial losses because of  lack of usurpation, lack of financial value before contract and consensus. In this article, these reasons have been discussed and rejected with a new interpretation of “Zeman-e-Yad” rule. This has been achieved by proving the possibility of cost of human actions before the contract and lack of true consensus. In addition, necessity of compensation of mentioned loss has been proven with strong reasons, La-Zarar, Etlaf-va-Tasbib and Nafy-e-Osr-va-Haraj rules and the wise person’s procedure.  Furthermore, this loss is compensable according to articles 22 and 171 of the Constitution and some articles specially article 14 of criminal procedure law(1392).

Judges make mistakes in the issuance or the sentence or in rendering of judgment and according to the Article 171 of Constitution, they cause material or moral spiritual harm to innocent people. In the case of fault, the judges are obliged to compensate the damage and if there is no fault, the government is obliged to compensate the damage.In any case, restoration of prestige mist be claimed from the accused. Therefore, the purpose of present study is to assess the feasibility of compensation. This is descriptive analytical article and has investigated the issue using the library method.Ethical Ethical Considerations: In present study, the princilples of text originality,honesty and trustworthiness have been observed. Compensation is of spiritual, material, and possible benefit type. Perviously, there was ambiguity regarding financial compensation.  Such as compensation in the preliminary stage and proof of fault. But now the new Code of Criminal Procedure has approved this matter. Given the present ambiguity in compensation caused by judge mistake, the unified judicial precedent No 791 was formed and it can be concluded that not only in preliminary stage but also in a stage of determining the punishment, the judge does not take responsibility for compensation for the damage caused by mistake.

In Islamic jurisprudence, the principle of incumbency (Lozum) of all contracts is accepted and the parties should fulfill their commitments (ta'ahhodāt). In cases where one of the parties of the contract does not fulfill its obligations, there is a breach and the breaching party must compensate the financial damage by returning the situation to the previous state. so; Examining compensation methods is of special importance.
In this research, using library studies and analytical-comparative methods, it has been tried to investigate the difference of opinions of Shi'a and Hanafi jurists in the methods of compensation for financial loss in terms of the object and the profits. In Shi'a jurisprudence, the person causing the loss is absolutely responsible for the financial loss, both in terms of the object and profits, and the margin of defects (ArshE 'oyub) and in the event of lesion (Ghabn) he is unconditionally responsible; However, Hanafi jurisprudence did not accept the guarantee of loss of benefits (ẕarare Manāfe') and the right to accept the deal and receive the margin (Arsh), and it has only and limitingly considered the option of lesion (Khiyare Ghabn) in the case of dissemble (Tadlis) as a right for the loser (Motaẕarrer) to cancel (Faskh) and terminate the transaction.
The writers, by examining the opinions of jurists, according to the fundamental difference between the two views on the guarantee of benefits and the proof of margin, the condition dissemble (Tadlis) is one of the important reasons for the issuance discrediting of narrations (Bi E'tebāriye Ṣoduriye Rewāyāt), the majority of the narrations in the narrative books of Sunnis unlike the Shia traditions, are not free of dissembler (Modalles) narrators. The abundance of intermediates, abandoning (Irsāl) and anxiety (Iẕṭirāb) in the muniment (Sanad) and the text of the narration is one of the common causes of the issuance debilitations between the shi'a and other Islamic schools of thought.

Corrosion is a physical and chemical reaction occurring between a substance and its surrounding environment leading to the change in the substance properties. Nowadays، corrosion has become one of the biggest issues in water quality control and can financially damage the water pipes and other water transmission and distribution installations. In addition، the penetration of heavy metal into water as a result of corrosion can be a threat to the consumers’ health conditions. Because of such negative health effects، regular chemical quality control of water seems mandatory.
To investigate the corrosion or precipitation potentials of drinking water in Anzali، which is supplied by Guilan water treatment plant and deep water wells.
To do so، parameters including pH، temperature، calcium hardness، alkalinity and Total Dissolved Solid (TDS) were measured and based on their values، four indices including Langelier Saturation Index، Ryzner Saturation Index، Aggressive index and Pokurious index were determined.
As revealed، the average values for Langelier Saturation، Ryzner Saturation، Aggressive and Pokurious indices were respectively (-0. 89)، (9. 29)، (12. 4) and (8. 82).
The results of the present study indicate that Anzali water resources have corrosion potential and are corrosive and thus can threaten the consumers’ health status in the long term.

Identification of hot spots is an important activity for improving the overall safety of roadway networks. A central issue in comparing HSID methods is the development and selection of quantitative and qualitative performance measures or criteria. In this research, The seven commonly applied HSID methods (accident frequency (AF), equivalent property damage only (EPDO) based the coefficients of the  PIARC, P-value (Islamic Republic of Iran Ministry Roads and Urban development), accident rate (AR), combined criteria, empirical Bayes (EB), societal risk-based) were compared against six robust and informative quantitative evaluation criteria (the site consistency test, the method consistency test, the total rank differences test, the total score test, sensitivity test and specificity test). These tests evaluate each method performance in a variety of areas, such as efficiency in identifying sites that show consistently poor safety performance, reliability in identifying the same hotspots in subsequent time periods .To evaluate the HSID methods, three years of crash data from the Jiroft-Kerman road were used. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method has been used for determination the importance coefficients of evaluation tests and as a result, showed that the total rank differences test is the most appropriate test. Also the quantitative evaluation tests showed that the EB method is the most consistent method for identifying hotspots and accident frequency, accident rate and combined criteria methods after EB method cause the identification of hotspots similar, that they have similar performance and their evaluation results is the same, have the best performance. Following these methods, the P-value, equivalent property damage only based the coefficients PIARC, and societal risk-based respectively. Societal
risk-based method performed worst in all of the tests. It should be noted that advantages associated with the EB method were based on crash data from one the road Iran country and the relative performances of HSID methods may change when using other crash data. However, the study results are consistent with earlier findings.    

rticle 319 of the Islamic criminal code of Iran, which has been based upon Islamic divine law, says: “Whenever a physician, although skillful and proficient in his treatments which are personally done or orders them to be done even with the permission of the patient or his parents, causes the death or disability or financial damages, will be liable.”But in paragraph 2 of Article 59 of the above-mentioned law it has been required that: “In any type of surgery or medical treatment, the permission of which has been given by the patient or his parents or guardians or any of their legal representatives, is not considered to be a criminal act, and in urgent circumstances obtaining consent is not necessary.”And in Article 60 it immediately adds the principle of exemption: “If a physician acquires permission before beginning treatment or surgery from the patient or his parent or guardian or the owner of the animal, he will not be legally liable for physical disabilities or financial damages and in emergency cases where obtaining permission is not possible nor will he be responsible for damages incurred. In this research all aspects of a physician’s responsibilities in relation to the patient are discussed drawing on great jurisprudents’ opinions as well as references in jurisprudence and law.

Spiritual damage is a legal event whereby the non-financial belongings of individuals and those rights related to their personality suffers. The family as an important social institution, due to the objectives and special features more than any other system is vulnerable and fragile to this type of damage because in this system rights and duties of individuals are mainly non-financial or have non-financial impacts. and what is often effected by spiritual harm, is everything which is necessary for realizing family goals (peace, love, devotion and loyalty) and it is clear that spiritual damage, is similar to financial damage which causes responsibility despite the fact that ethics is the basis of the family and it is also a legal responsibility. The present article aims at studying examples of spiritual damage in relations between spouses and the responsibility associated with it; because the existence of this type of damage within the family circle and a lack of its legal protection leads to misuse and the non fulfillment of the rights of family members and finally the collapse of the foundation of the family.

In Iranian law and in accordance with Article 14 of the new Criminal Procedure Code, losses resulting from a crime are divided into material, spiritual and possible profits. This Code has made a significant change to some rules on civil liabilities. Having said that, it may be criticized on the ground that it excludes the compensation caused by crimes leading to mulct (Diyah) and authoritative legal Ta’zir from the full compensation principle without providing a comprehensive definition for spiritual losses and without proposing an accurate definition and example for authoritative legal Ta’zir.
Claim for spiritual and possible profits losses leads to authoritative legal Ta’zir.  Mulct shall happen in cases in which the sentence is not a financial loss and its compensation is sentenced to be non-financial. The limitation applied by Note2 in Article14 does not include the lost profits in crimes against properties and hence it can be claimed. The authoritative legal Ta’zir instances, based on Narratives, may not include losing possible profits, and in crimes causing retaliation, Haad (punishment by lash), non-authoritative legal Ta’zir of possible profits and spiritual losses, it will be claimed. According to Article14 of new Criminal Procedure Code, the legislator refers to compensation for spiritual losses in a material or other ways.

The International Court of Justice, on October 11, 2018, responded unanimously to Iran's request for an interim order in the alleged violations of the treaty of amity case and required the United States to take the necessary measures on free exportation to Iran about humanitarian needs, including medicines and medical devices, foodstuffs and agricultural commodities, spare parts, equipment and associated services necessary for the safety of civil aviation, and do not create no restrictions on the payments and other transfers of funds related to these measures. In the course of the proceedings of The Court, the United States, in addition to proposing multiple objections to the conditions of issuing the interim order (prima facie jurisdiction, the plausibility of the claimed rights and its relation to the interim order, the urgency and irreparable prejudice), argued that the requested interim order will violate the USA's sovereignty. The Court, in its conclusions, which often was as a result of the acceptance of the arguments of the Iranian legal team, affirmed the necessary conditions for the issuance of a interim order. According to The Court, the criterion of irreparable prejudices is not merely financial damage, but damage to human lives.