scholarly journals A Comparative Study of Judicial Control in Iran, U.S.A and Canada

Author(s):  
Askar Jalalian ◽  
Parisa Anvari

Supervision and control need tools and techniques that would usually take two forms: the first form is that the same court that hears claims and complaints submitted by the departments and its agents, handles other claims and all the claims are processed by these courts of justice. Another form of judicial supervision is supervision in a dual judicial system and that is a judicial system wherein only specialized courts are competent enough to review administrative claims and to investigate the conducts of the department and its agents. In this paper, we deal with how these tools are used in advanced legal systems like the U.S., and Canada and the Iranian legal system. The result we discover in the end is that in all stages of supervision by the supervisor and the supervised, there must be a sense of accountability to people and officials and this will be achieved by transparency in performance. In the absence of transparency supervision will be disrupted and some economic and administrative corruption will arise, because wherever there are secrecy and monopoly, the results will be inevitably corruption.

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Nader Ghanbari ◽  
Hassan Mohseni ◽  
Dawood Nassiran

Comparing the legal systems is a specific method in which due to its important function is considered as a separate branch in law. None of the branches in law can place its knowledge merely on ideas and findings within the national borders. Several basic objections have been given regarding the definition and purpose of comparative study in civil procedure. In addition there are specific problems regarding studying practically the similar systems in a legal system like differences in purpose, definition and concept. In different legal systems like civil law and common law systems in which there is a divergence, even the judicial system`s organs and judges` appointment and judicial formalism are different, which add to the problems of the comparative study. Reviewing these differences could lead to a better understanding of these legal systems and recognizing the common principles in making use of each other`s findings considering these differences and indicate the obstacles of comparative study in this regard.


2010 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 1099-1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Yin ◽  
Peter Duff

Taxonomy, as a methodological tool introduced from natural science, brought the categorization of legal systems to comparative law.1The term ‘legal family’2is normally used as a metaphor, because it recognizes that within each grouping there are many variations. Each of the legal families is regarded as a combination of fundamental features of legal systems which have certain similarities. As an analytical device, taxonomy renders the comparison of different laws and legal institutions manageable by means of simplifying or abstracting the diverse and complicated realities of a myriad of legal systems. As a result, the concept of legal families acts as a support for legal borrowing and transplantation, as well as comprising an inevitable part of most comparative law works. Even where as few as two jurisdictions are involved, the categorization of legal families is still a useful tool for most comparative legal analysis. Assisted by the notion of legal families, comparativists can readily understand and explore an unfamiliar legal system.3Normally, such scholars tend to accept the conventional or widely accepted categorization of a particular legal system as belonging to a certain legal family. However, without detailed scrutiny of the first-hand material, distortions may arise as a result of preconceptions held at the beginning of the comparative study.4


2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeung Lap Fu

With the progress and development of science and technology, medical biotechnology has made great progress, which created an objective market and lucrative returns for the medical and health industry as well as provided assistance for patients. However, the hidden risk of biotechnology may burst at any time and is not conducive to the health and safety of consumers and social stability. Therefore, regulation and control of the government over medical biotechnology research enterprises is particularly important, which requires the establishment of relevant legal systems. This paper attempts to find out the inadequacies of the existing laws and regulations related to medical biotechnology in China by evaluation so as to put forward some constructive suggestions to help establish a more perfect medical and biotechnology legal system. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrián Csajka-Vándor

The study examines the essential differences between European legal systems and the Islamic legal system, the Sharia. It points out the differences between secular and religious legal systems, the differences of evaluating and judging crimes and punishments, the judicial system of Islamic law and the sanctions it offers.


1996 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-160
Author(s):  

AbstractThe process of modernising the Emirates' legal systems which started in the early 1960s essentially involved replacing the traditional system of law and justice (which was effectively governed by the Shari'a), with laws and institutions of Western inspiration. In addition, alongside the traditional Shari'a courts (which applied Shari'a law and were presided over by Shari'a-trained judges), the


Author(s):  
Stefan Vogenauer

This chapter concludes Volume III of Studies in the Contract Laws of Asia. It summarizes the main findings on the 13 Asian jurisdictions covered (China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam). With regard to both the interpretation of contracts and the control of unfair terms, the various legal sources and their ‘Western’ sources of inspiration are described, questions of classification and terminology discussed, and the major substantive issues that arise across legal systems examined. The latter include the dichotomy of ‘subjective’ and ‘objective’ approaches to contractual interpretation; the admissible aids to interpretation, such as customs, usages, the commercial background, good faith, and the negotiations of the parties; the conflict between ‘literalist’ and ‘contextualist’ approaches, particularly with regard to gap-filling by way of implication of terms or ‘supplementary interpretation’; the ‘covert’ judicial control of unfair terms under general contract law doctrines, such as incorporation, interpretation, and the rules on procedural unfairness; the open control based on specific legislation on either particular types of term, unfair standard terms, or consumer contracts, and the supporting enforcement mechanisms. In conclusion, the chapter highlights the differences and similarities that can be observed across Asia, relates these to the wide variety of legal transfers that occurred in the relevant legal systems, and maps out issues for further research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document