مجله حقوق خصوصی
پیاپی 38 (بهار و تابستان 1400)

Undoubtedly, one of the most important concerns in lodging a petition and initiating a lawsuit is the scope of hearing within the limitations of the petition. Legitimacy, nature of rule and its limits seem to be important in order to clarify based on what criteria the scope of hearing is determined or limited or forbidden. The scope of hearing within the limitations of the petition can be inferred from the spirit and letter of Civil Procedure and some jurisprudential guidelines. The findings show that observance of this imperative procedural rule is a must in all hearing stages and is subject to sanction. There are some exceptions to the subject of the scope of hearing within the limitations of the petition but, these exceptions must be interpreted restrictively in favor of observance of this rule and other legal principles and rules including the principle of Impartiality of Judges. The present descriptive-analytical research examines this rule and the limitations of the court’s authority to add parts to or omit parts of the petition and the lawsuit on the basis of legal principles and jurisprudential guidelines and also it aims to provide some suggestions in this regard.

Direct action is one of the grounds that legislators protect creditor rights. Following the 2016 amendments to the French Civil Code, direct action, which had long been accepted in French law, was specified in the Civil Code. Direct action does not have a clear legal status in Iranian law, but it has been analyzed by jurists in Egyptian and French law. The purpose of a comparative study of direct action in the first place is to clarify its theoretical aspect in Iranian law to be considered in the amendments to the Iranian Civil Code. Secondly, the practical aspect of this legal institution, as mentioned in Egyptian law, is important. Because the direct-action mechanism can reduce the prolongation of the trial and, consequently, reduce the volume of litigation. Under Iranian law, as in Egyptian and French law, the practical aspect of direct action can be provided by anticipating this legal institution in a lease, tax evasion lawsuits, alimony lawsuits, and other cases that are challenging for the judiciary. This will be an effective shortcut for both the beneficiary and the judiciary.

The forum selection clause in international commercial contracts, which is also known as jurisdiction clause, is an agreement based on which the parties of maritime shipment of goods choose a forum the settle the disputes arising from the contract. The incorporation of such clauses in maritime bills of lading results in granting jurisdiction to a foreign court and deprivation of jurisdiction from an internal competent court. The proceedings in a foreign court, in many cases, lead to the application of governing law on the settlement of disputes and affect the carrier’s responsibilities. On the other hands, most of the international and national rules governing on the maritime shipments of goods are mandatory and the validity of foreign forum selection clause in maritime bills of lading has been doubted because of the inconsistency with public policy. Regardless of complying with the fundamental circumstances governing on the validity of contracts in the formation of jurisdiction agreements, the courts of different countries consider some criteria for the application of such clause based on their national legal system and they may also give no effect to the forum selection clause due to the forum non convenient or evasion of the law. However, the validity of forum selection clause is currently accepted in most international agreements and national legal systems and the courts of different countries are complying with. The main theme of the present study is to examine the validity of this clause.

Video games are one of the modern embodiments of entertainment that their legal protection is usually carried out through means of copyright; this course of action however, cannot be considered flawless as it includes shortcomings that emanate from the very nature of this form of protection; as a result, defining a pervasive frame of protection for these intellectual phenomena must be sought through means of industrial property protection, including patents, industrial designs and trademark. In this work, by resorting to comparative analysis of United States and Iran’s legal systems, we concluded that, as opposed to current methods, effective protection of video games needs thorough exploitation of legal capacities in both branches of intellectual property law. Moreover, reserving some technical parts of video games as trade secrets is another possibility that can be very effective, provided that the exploitation of the game is not against confidentiality of those parts.

Standard-form contracts drafters try to prepare all the necessary terms and conditions, which are a set of business customs, in the contract form; however, these efforts may not satisfy the parties. They have a right to add agreed terms and conditions, which do not exist in the sample form, to the text of the contract, or, if these terms are too detailed, the clauses will be attached to the contract. They may also omit or replace some of the words and phrases in the sample contract. Such changes may lead to conflicts between the text of the standard-form contract and the supplementary phrases, which sometimes cannot be resolved without removing one of them. Also, if a word or phrase is removed from the standard-form contract, the question is whether the parties merely want the deleted phrase not to be part of the agreement or whether these omissions will provide meaningful feedback. With the aim of achieving mutual intention of the parties, the judges resolve the conflict by preferring additional phrases and interpret the ambiguities of the remaining text of the standard-form contract by using the deleted words. Since the courts face challenges in this regard, this article tries to study the differences or unconsidered points and provide an appropriate solution.

Inventions are important factors of economic development and society welfare ; however, they may cause damage to consumers or production inputs due to their imperfection or incompleteness, during mass production or in the stage of their use. Irrespective of goods and services producers’ liability, the inventor could also be considered liable for the harmful act due to his presence as one of the causes of loss. In Iranian law, there has been no specific study of the prospective liability for inventors, while examining their liabilities seem necessary. With regard to the industrial and technical complexities in this field, it is difficult to apply the principles of contractual liability or traditional principles of non-contractual liability such as fault, and considering the interests of society and consumers of new inventions, a strict liability for inventors is preferred as it is applicable to defective goods. At present, in Common law, lawsuits against inventors due to patent imperfections are examined based on liability for defective goods. In Imamiah jurisprudence, by invoking some jurisprudential principles such as "Al Ghunm Bil Ghurm" (one can claim profit only if one is ready to take liability), the burden of liability can be placed on the inventors without the need to prove fault.

There are four major jurisprudential opinions on the possibility of returning the debt to the debtor. Those who believe in the impossibility of the return of the defunct debt argue for the rule of "defunct will never return" and the principle of non-recurrence. Citing the intangible nature of debt, the manner of wise people, and the validity of termination and cancellation of contracts whit the subject of debt, some believe that debt recurrence is possible. Some believe that the defunct debt is like the destroyed debt. But if there is a reason for returning of debt, a debt like a debt that has been overthrown return. Some have considered the intention of the parties as decisive. If the intention of the parties is possession, the return of debt is possible, but with the intention of payment debt, debt will not return. According to Articles 806, 701 and 723 civil code, the legislator has accepted the above view. Some of the results of accepting the view of return the debt like a debt that has been overthrown are the non-return of guarantees and documents belonging to debt, and the invalidity of installments on it and it must pay immediately.

Architectural works have been protected as one of the most important fields of art in international documents (such as Article 1, paragraph 2, of the Berne Convention) and the law of different countries (such as Article 7, paragraph 2 of the Law on the Protection of Authors, Writers and Artists of Iran). In practice, it faces several serious challenges such as analyzing the concept of the building, separating the original work (plan) from the building, and analyzing the element of originality. In the present article, we have attempted to analyze the element of originality as one of the pillars of a work that can be supported in the field of architecture. The most important criteria of originality in architectural works can be called non-functional criterion, dissection criterion and absolute criterion. However, due to the lack of any of these criteria, there are also sub-criteria that can help the judge in this respect. The analysis of each of these main and sub-criteria ultimately leads us to the conclusion that there is no superior or absolute criterion.

The most important document to be used in any patent litigation is the patent itself which defines a patent right and determines its scope. The presumption of validity is a judicial presumption accepted in many countries.  But the applicability of this presumption relies on factors like the patent registration system and the way the registration authority works. This article examines the necessity of applying this presumption in Iranian legal system. The descriptive analytical method is applied in this article mainly and some case studies are done as well. Finally taking into account the two branches of Patents valid in Iran (patents issued under act of 1310 and those issued under the act of 1386) it concludes that this presumption should not be necessarily adopted in all Iranian courts according to the type of patents concerned because some are issued under a declaration system and others are issued under a substantive search system.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are creating a promising future in tech innovations. From early cancer detection apps to autonomous vehicles, possibilities seem to be endless. Yet, with such technology, harm is also bound to follow. In such instances, the issue of tort liability begs our attention. Who should bear reasonability in case of an accident? When is an injury foreseeable? Such questions in negligence law will require a different perspective when one is dealing with an accident arisen out of the implementation of AI. Should tort law take the route of products liability law? Or will traditional negligence law be sufficient? This article takes a bite at the current literature on autonomous vehicles and medical malpractice law and the challenges of assigning liability. It also offers a look into possible guiding principles for AI. This article aims to provide a roadmap for further research in Iran on the intersection of torts and AI.