مجله تحقیقات حقوقی
پیاپی 88 (زمستان 1398)

The new European Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, approved in 2019, is designed on the one hand to provide more legal support in favor of content producers and on the other hand to offer new opportunities for consumers to access copyright-protected content. In that directive three main supportive measures can be recognized: out-of-commerce works, judicial contract adjustment mechanism and protection of press publication concerning digital uses. Through comparative study, it can be deduced that out-of-commerce works and certain contractual support, except judicial adjustment mechanism, can be provided via new Iranian Copyright Bill. However, the protection of press publication, through related rights, is not offered in the latter Bill. That is an issue which can be discussed in drafting the final version of the new Iranian Copyright Bill. . Through comparative study, it can be deduced that out-of-commerce works and certain contractual support, except judicial adjustment mechanism, can be provided via new Iranian Copyright Bill. However, the protection of press publication, through related rights, is not offered in the latter Bill. That is an issue which can be discussed in drafting the final version of the new Iranian Copyright Bill.

Due to the importance of the role of the executive power in displaying the authority of the Islamic Republic of Iran and protecting the principle of the hierarchy of legal norms, along with the judicial supervision of the Administrative Justice Court, supervision is also exercised by the Parliaments' (speaker) with helping votes "Committee of review and compliance of government approvals with the Laws" on the compliance of the Cabinets' ministers' approvals with the parliaments' approvals. Hence, according to legal documents, the Parliaments' president (speaker) is the authority to recognize the contradictions of Cabinets' ministers' approvals with the law. The main question of this research is the analysis of the nature of the guarantee of the implementation of the above-mentioned supervision and the resulting effects. In response could be said, the gradual evolution of the type of supervisory competence of the parliaments' speaker from "only informing and declaring the contradiction approved with the law" to "cancel the effect ", with attention to concepts of above guarantee and neglecting its effect is violation some principles and rules of law such as the principle of rule of law (9, 34, 85,138 and…principles of constitution), the principle of judiciary and responsible for administrative authority and ultimately, it is destroyer citizenship rights. In this research that is of descriptive-analytical type, has been used of library resources

Iran and the U.S. are among the not-so-many countries in the world which still assign some role to reciprocity in their respective laws of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. The doubts about what this role exactly is in each case and how political tensions between the two countries has affected, or might affect, the way each of them applies its rule of reciprocity to the judgments rendered by the other’s courts specifically makes a detailed analysis of these two legal systems and their interaction, what this article attempts, worthwhile. Sketching a basic view of reciprocity as a concept and its current global status, the first chapter provides an introduction to the topic. The next two chapters explore the laws of the U.S. and Iran, respectively, on reciprocity, addressing their approaches to a number of practical issues ensuing from their commitment to this rule. The fourth chapter examines each country’ application of its own version of the rule to its specific relation with the other. Toward this end, it both studies the actual decisions of Iranian and the U.S. courts that involved this matter and contemplates other, possible scenarios in deciding the reciprocity questions in light of the interpretive possibilities that the two legal systems open up.

Due to the fragmentation and inefficiency in wife’s financial rights the Iranian Family Protection Act, enacted in 1391 , this article aims to review and analyze the role of efficiency of wife’s financial rights (alimony, dowry, free gift and reasonable wage) in stabilization and integration of the family institution. This study with library research method describes and analyzes the content of the Iranian Family Protection Act, enacted in 1391, through comparative approach with Imam's jurisprudence and western law. The research results show that generally the wife's financial rights can be balanced in two models; the equality model was followed in the French legal system and the ultimate equality system was identified in Shiite Jurisprudence. It is better to make intended amendments of Iranian legislator in each of the two forms and models and in a comprehensive family act, current legal fragmentation and dispersion of wife’s financial rights that led to its inefficiency is resolved.

Family is the foundation of social life and the cornerstone of the society. After marriage and family formation, each of the members, including the parents and children, is going to have special rights and duties towards one another. In Zoroastrianism after legal and official marriage, known as pādixšāyīhā zani, family members acquire certain rights. This type of marriage is much like permanent marriage in Islam, in which family members have certain rights and duties too. Conducting a comparative study, this article surveys the rights and duties of family members from the perspective of both Zoroastrianism and Islam, showing that there are many similarities between these two religions that might be an indication of the continuity between their traditions. Conducting a comparative study, this article surveys the rights and duties of family members from the perspective of both Zoroastrianism and Islam, showing that there are many similarities between these two religions that might be an indication of the continuity between their traditions.

Objection of the administrative justice conception does not occur independently of the minds of percepts; therefore, this is the objectivity of a cognitive product which enables the object of the identifier to be in conjunction with its subject and is studied in the contractual context. A review of the administrative justice theory in the contractual context, based on institutionalized methodology, is similar to John Rawls, theory of justice, requires the consideration of three components of public interest, right and need as the aspects of administrative justice in the administrative law system. The public interest is a two-dimensional concept; the first aspect concerns the actions and decisions of a kind of government and public authority which often made through the regulation and statute of law. The second one is judicial review on such acts which are the supervisions of administrative courts on the interest of government and individual benefits. Therefore, the conflict between individual benefits and public interests in this aspect of administrative justice is more prominent. The concept of administrative justice on the right is determined in formal and substance dimensions. Administrative procedure and procedural code are the means of guaranteeing the right to respect the formal right. Obtaining case decisions, as well as investigating public’s claims to the actions and decisions of the authorities, are fundamentally the types of formal right. The third dimension of administrative justice is needed that appears in the right-claim and legitimate expectations in the legal system.

The purpose of the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees is to provide international protection to those who have been deprived from national protection against persecution. International protection is the protection granted by any country other than the country of nationality or the country of residence (in the case of those not having a nationality). This protection is granted when the conditions set forth in 1951 Convention are met. Moreover, the Convention includes provisions to ensure that the refugee protection regime would not provide a cover for persons involved in serious not political crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes against peace, war crimes or acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. In considering the status of terrorist criminals in the Refugee Convention, this article seeks to show that the perpetrators of terrorist crimes are covered by these regulations and could not benefit from refugee status.