Comparison of Contractual Liability Patterns in the British Legal System and the Iranian Legal System

No part of society can elude legitimate occasions. Some of the time, eagerly or unwillingly, another is hurt, and the issue of hurtful obligation or how to compensate is raised by others. The rules and controls of each nation or other nations may be distinctive, and the way of demonstrating obligation and its components and the approach of the courts in deciding the sum of harms may moreover be diverse. Since the legitimate British framework is to some degree diverse from the legitimate Iranian framework, it appears valuable to know the sees of this framework. The think about of these likenesses and contrasts, counting the way of sanctioning laws, their modification, the way of the trial of courts and the limits of duties and the way of execution of judgments, raises numerous scores and gives other viewpoints for analysts to be utilized in tackling issues in society. The article presented attempts to clarify the perspective of the UK legal framework and compare it with the Iranian legal framework in terms of designing respectful risks within the contract to realize the over the result. All legitimate frameworks look for a full stipend. In this respect, due to the reality that the strategy of remuneration among other remuneration strategies within the UK, the legitimate framework of this nation has set exact criteria based on which the assurance of full emolument. It is more standard and precise. Iranian law is generally appropriate on the issue of damages. This can occur despite the fact that the refusal of the rule of the presence of a way of a stipend in infringement of legally binding commitments has not been considered with assurance.

Criminal Liability for other Behavior by Looking at Vote in Courts

Despite the fact that crime and punishment are personal, in answer to the question of whether other persons besides the perpetrators of the crime are responsible? According to the circumstances, a positive answer can be given. Over time, with the qualitative growth of laws, Vicarious liability was formed. Until 2013, the criminal liability of legal entities existed exceptionally in scattered laws. Legal doctrine has proposed different theories in this regard, which in general can be divided into two categories: "Fault doctrine" and " Risk doctrine ". Iranian law, according to the votes of the courts before and after the Islamic Revolution, is more inclined to the first theory; At the same time, in a few votes, the opposite opinion can be seen. The purpose of this study is to investigate the status of the principle of criminal liability due to other behavior in Iranian law which is obtained based on the method of describing and analyzing legal materials and judicial opinions.

The marriage contract by contemporary channels of communication – A comparative study between jurisprudence theories and Iranian family law –: عقد النكاح بوسائل الاتصال الحديثة – دراسة مقارنة بين النظريات الفقهية وقانون الأحوال الشخصية الإيراني –

Marriage contract by contemporary means of communication is a marriage in which communication is carried out between the parties of the contract via the Internet. The channels are confined to writing, oral, or direct witnessing. This contract is one of the new conflicts in the matter of family law. The study followed the jurisprudential conditional method in order to derive the ruling on the marriage contract through these channels by presenting the opinions of the four jurisprudential schools of thought and the leading doctrine. Next, the study applied the descriptive analytical and comparative approach by mentioning, analysing, comparing, discussing, and then weighing the opinions. Then the relevant articles were mentioned in the Iranian Family Law. The research concluded with a set of results. The most important of which is that marriage through written, audio, or visual means of communication is permissible and does not differ in its validity from the direct and traditional marriage contract. Furthermore, all the conditions of the marriage contract stipulated in Iranian law do not oppose the marriage contract through modern channels of communication. Moreover, the only difference is in the use of modern channels of communication through which all the elements and conditions of marriage can be met. Accordingly, the legal articles related to this issue can be amended in the Iranian Family Law. The research recommended amending Article 1062 of the Iranian Family Law to include marriage by modern channels of communication and an electronic application is to be created for this purpose. The research has laid down the basics on which the application is based, such as a statement of scope of its use, its specifications, and other related matters.

Analyzing the Challenges of Female Audience Participation in Iranian Stadiums

Background and Aim: The purpose of this article is to examine the barriers and challenges for female spectators in Iranian stadiums and to provide facilitating strategies. Methods: This study is a cross-sectional study with an overview of the prevailing conditions of society as well as reviewing Iranian law and referring to sports legal and legal texts. The researcher examines the fatwas of Shia authorities and the historical background of Iranian sports from 1970 to 2019, and the presence of women in stadiums in the past, and examines the conditions for collecting relevant material in this field. Results: Women were free to attend Iranian stadiums in the pre-revolutionary years, and Iranian women could freely watch national and club games, but in the post-revolutionary years, in line with the Islamic Republic's policies on the separation of women and men and the views of authorities. Shi'a imitation and religious rulings and religious issues were limited. As part of the country's overall policies on women, sport was also affected by these policies, and it seems that removing these barriers should be seen in a broader theoretical framework. Conclusion: By examining the current state of the country and examining Iranian law and referring to Iranian history from 1970 to 2019, the researcher has concluded that we do not have a law prohibiting women from entering the stadium, which is a public place. They are there to watch the matches and cheer on their favorite teamn

Liability for Violating Standards in Shia Jurisprudence and Iranian Law

Standards are of critical importance for protecting public health and ensuring the integrity of transactions and the consistency of the quality of goods and services. Violation of standards can do significant harm to individuals and the society as a whole. Since people are entitled to the right of consuming goods with adequate safety and quality, standards themselves can be considered a civil right. The issue of damages and compensation in relation to the violation of standards has been addressed in Iranian law as well as Shia jurisprudence. In Shia jurisprudence, causing harm to others makes a person liable to coercive action and compensation. According to Article 1 of the Iranian Civil Liability Law, anyone who has intentionally or unintentionally caused material or moral damage to another person’s life, health, property, liberty, dignity, business reputation or any other right that the other person is entitled to by law is liable for compensation for the damages caused by his action. In this article, we examine the jurisprudential arguments that support the necessity of enforcing standards and the liabilities that arise from violation of standards in Iranian law. In this regard, Quran verses and hadiths call for accuracy and consistency in all matters, honesty in work, and respect for laws. The Shia jurisprudential principles that call for the observance of standards include La-zarar (no-harm), Tasbib (causation), and Ghorur (deception). Therefore, there is a strong foundation in Shia jurisprudence for enforcing standards. However, Iranian law requires stronger laws with harsher punishment for violators to prevent negligence in complying with standards.