مجله حقوق خصوصی
پیاپی 21 (پاییز و زمستان 1391)

Investment in oil and gas upstream activities is very important for the exploration and development of oil and gas fields. Different and various laws and regulations deal with the investment in upstream operations. By reviewing these various laws and regulations، this research paper tries to discuss to what extent these laws and regulations have created legal confident for foreign investment upstream activities. In this paper first it is evidenced that the legal possibility of foreign investment in oil and gas upstream operations has not been very clear. Second، the requirements of upstream oil contracts، as a vehicle for investment in oil and gas fields، have not been provided in detail by the legislation. Third، it is not clear which authority has been authorized to outline such contracts requirements and whether it is the cabinet، economic council، ministry of oil or National Iranian Oil Company.

Unenforceability (Inopposabilité) is a double sanction. Because this sanction combines in the same time “validity” and “nullity”، validity between the parties and nullity to third parties. Our law obtains this sanction from French law. Thus for an exact study، referring to original law is inevitable. In Iranian law there are sporadic instances of unenforceability. But sometimes unenforceability is misdiagnosis with similar concepts، and its instances are neglected in the texts. Also we need general principles to use in ambiguous and silent cases. Generally unenforceability is misdiagnosis with “inefectivity” and “relative nullity”. Current instances are in three branches: civil law، commercial law، and intellectual property rights. Also in these grounds we can obtain general principles: “the motive role in unenforceability”، “third party’s concept”، “type of legal act”، “situation of subsequent legal acts”، “subjectivity or objectivity” and “retroactivity”.

“Personality rights” are bundle of rights which protect the integrity and inviolability of the physical and moral integrity of persons against some threats. Right to honor، right to privacy، right to one’s image and the right to personal identity are the main rights which protect the moral integrity of persons against invasions of the mass media. Hence، balancing between two sets of interests (freedom of speech and protection of personality) is an important matter in many countries around the world. Comparative study shows that two different basic approaches to the area of civil protection of personality rights could be ascertained: General Right of Personality and Specific Personality Rights. Each approach has some conveniences and inconveniences. In our country، there is no definite approach with respect to the matter، but general rules of civil liability and specially، Civil Liability Act (1919) could protect some aspects of personality against media. This article، intends to، firstly، study those approaches، which are used in other countries (supposed as representative of civil law and common law traditions) for civil protection of personality rights against mass media (Part I)، then، the legal bases of civil liability (fault، negligence، gross negligence،…) of media (Part II) and finally، remedies for violation of personality rights (Part III).

It is generally accepted that no one is allowed to abuse his legal rights accorded by a country for evasion from some limitations provided by the same country and several laws and verdicts have considered and confirmed this requirement as a rule. Nevertheless there is neither common sense about neither the conditions under which such a rule may be applied nor the reactions to be taken against such a fraud.

Resignation of an attorney has important effects on the principal and the process of trial. If the court or principal do not know about the resignation of the attorney، it may create irreparable losses for principal or cause prolongation of proceedings. So determining exact and comprehensive criterions about the resignation of attorney is necessary. If the attorney does not observe these criterions، it may cause disciplinary or civil liability or both of them. However، due to the necessity of the protection of principal''s rights، some measures of resigned attorney is acceptable. For instance، presenting an incomplete petition by resigned attorney is satisfactory to the court، while the mentioned action of the attorney is a kind of disciplinary offence. Sometimes legislature requires renewal of notification to principal، while it is serviced to the attorney and if it has been proved that the principal was not aware of the resignation of attorney، the principal''s awareness date is the commencement of the computation of time limits. This provision may endanger other party''s rights and cause prolongation of proceedings and result in collusion between principal and his/her attorney.

There have been a lot of debates between law authors about formation of valid sale contract to the building while constructing for a long time. After enactment of forward sale Act in 1389 forward sale building during construction process accepted. However some facts were not answered clearly when the transferring of ownership will be happened: Through official forward sale contract or transferring in deep after finishing the construction. Legislature in newly enacted legislation counted forward sale building as the new contract which has its own principals and following common، regulation. Thus the contract of forward sale and transfer of ownership in real estate in constructed section will be done officially but unconstructed section will not be followed this way. Because transferring of ownership is conditional to constructing by reseller and payment by presbyter. As in Islamic law the sale contract are devised to various kinds cash and credit، forward sale، thence there is no prohibition that is considered as a special sale contract. Regulating official documents is one of the elements of coming into and paying the price is very important. Regulating final documents is for stabling existent، ownership.

In modern legal systems there are a variety of sources of law. Judicial precedent is one of the legal sources; thus، precedents of Supreme Court، like enactments of parliament، are enforceable in courts. This similarity between precedents and acts impose many problems as role of Supreme Court in interpretation of laws. But the most important problem is the possibility of changing previous precedent by posterior one. In our legal system legislator has provided Supreme Court from such changes. Whereas، such act seemed to be conflicting with legal principles and constitutional law; general assembly of Supreme Court cannot conflict enactments of parliament but it can change its previousprecedents. Also legislator، by enacting laws، can rescinded judicial precedents; because، in hierarchical ordering of legal rules، precedents are inferior to enactments. So if judicial precedent conflict by law will be revoked.