PRIVATE LAW STUDIES
Year:2007 | Volume:- | Issue:74|Papers Count:12

It is disputed whether the law is an autonomous discipline or not? The adherents of the autonomy of law mainly are they, legal scholarship should be about distinctively legal topics and is not or should not be about other topics.The supporters of dependence of law mainly are legal realism, economic analysis of law, law and society, critical legal studies movement. They say the governing presupposition of them is that the content of law cannot be comprehended in and of itself, simply as law. Law is considered to have no meaning except that which it manages to learn from other disciplines and inquiries. Therefore, the study of law becomes parasitic on the study of non-legal disciplines and law provides only the authoritative form into which the conclusions of non-legal thinking are translated.In this article, have also studied Islamic Law in this regard and concluded that the law is not absolutely autonomous or absolutely dependant on other disciplines.

According to the most famous decrees from Shia and Sunni Islamic jurists the blood money for a woman is half of that for a man. The Islamic Sentencing Act which endorses this is derived from Shia School of Jurisprudence (Article 300). The advocates of such ruling rely on some Islamic texts but some of the Sunni and Shia jurists argue for equality between man and woman. This group of jurists, refuting the former group's arguments, in their belief of equality between men and women's blood money rely on the general understanding of the religious texts which do not favor inequality between men and women. In this paper the argument§ of both groups will be discussed.

Optimal level of regulation and regulatory reform seem to be an undisputed objective. However, in the context of financial regulation there are differences and disagreements over the optimal level of disclosure of information and capital adequacy standards. In this paper, instead of offering, a substantive solution, we argue for a competitive process through which the optimal level of disclosure of information and capital adequacy standards are likely to emerge. The solution, which we suggest, consists of an international framework combining competition and co-operation among national regulatory regimes. We identify WTO/GATS as such a framework, which facilitates both regulatory competition and regulatory co-operation. The ultimate outcome of this integrated process, which simultaneously emphasizes liberalization and regulation of financial markets is the emergence of an optimal level of regulation related to mandatory disclosure of information and capital adequacy standards.

The aim of this article is evaluation of Traditional Knowledge (TK) protection possibility and ways under national legal system potentials. In this direction, case laws - which conventions and international treaties are very important party of them - provide proper capacity to protect this knowledge.Among them Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) and Convention on Desertification have necessary capacities to conduct international commitments, but the main problems of them are lack of sanctions, lack of national organizational structures and ambiguity of necessary for regulations.This article has noticed to above problems as well as threatens to TK, possible misuses of TK, and suggests the way to protect TK in legal framework and principles.

If judge enforces law improperly by mistake or by misuse of authority, the rights of the accused person, or parties to the case may be infringed. For centuries, the civil liability of the judge in different legal systems has not been efficiently taken into consideration in spite of the so-called "principle of judicial immunity". By the growth of democracy and with special regard to the principle of equality, the legislators make an effort to take a distance from the principle of absolute immunity, and shift toward civil liability of judge or government.At present, the judge in western countries will confront not only criminal and tribunal liabilities but also civil liabilities when violate the laws. In such a case, a significant portion of losses or damages to the citizens shall be indemnified by the government or insurance companies. In the legal system of Iran, though stipulated in the article 171 of the constitutional law, those parties having sustained a loss or damage due to improper legal decisions are not effectively subjected to the indemnity of the losses incurred. To investigate this issue and its comparison with the legal systems of a number of developed societies in brief is the core discussion of the present paper.

Over the last three decades, the restorative model of justice has prevailed in administration of justice and the resolution of conflicts. The advantages of this model over the classic models of criminal justice, i.e. "retributive justice" and "rehabilitative justice", is that this model not only resolves the disputes arising from the crime but it does also resolve the disputes through reconciliation and compromise between the rights of victim and the offender.On the other hand, Islamic criminal justice consists of two parts which deal either with issues related to national security or with the violation of important religious prohibitions. The punishment for these crimes often involves corporal punishment such as capital punishment and cutting some parts of body. In the holy Quran and the tradition of holy prophet of Islam and other leaders peace and reconciliation have been recommended, and this research is seeking to examine the application of "restorative justice to Islamic criminal justice in the areas of crimes against person.

AB a rule, crimes is unforgivable. Therefore, forgiveness has virtually no effect on criminal liability. It can only lead to a reduction in punishment. For crimes that are unforgivable, forgiveness can become perplexing and confuse legal authorities. The present paper attempts to discuss the complex dimensions of this issue including forgivable and unforgivable crimes, the court's responsibilities with regard to decreasing punishments, the nature and limitations of the decision of the court, and identity of the forgiver.

Restorative justice is frequently portrayed as a new paradigm of criminal Justice, which differs sharply from the dominant paradigm of retributive Justice. Retributive justice paradigm focuses on punishment and just desert. In this paradigm crime defined as violation of the state.Retributivism is the view that punishment is justified on the grounds that wrongdoing merits punishment.Restorative justice paradigm emphasizes on problem solving and restores victim, offender and community. In this paradigm crime defined as violation of one person by another. "Restorative justice" signifies those measures that are designed to give victims of crime an opportunity to tell the offender about the impact of the offending on them and their families, and to encourage offenders to accept responsibility for, and to repair the harm they caused. Its general aims are to reduce re-offending, to restore the relationship between the victim and the offender that was disturbed by the offence, and to improve victim's experiences with the criminal justice system.

Hans Kelsen is one of the most famous Legal philosophers in the entire world that his legal thoughts have always been drawing attention and critics. Pure theory of law, unity of law system and logic of law system are his the most famous theories. In this article, we put forward these theories and challenge them.

In the direction towards support the laborers, the law makers in England have tried to create laws by paying attention to the security of the jobs by restricting and limiting the expelling of the laborers. But, the ways of expelling the workers have not been totally restricted.Striations based on one of the important instance of the Britain Laws is the Utilization of the contract to a short term one, and the employers can only use them in case of necessity of the worker's sickness or resignation of the permanent works.Although Iran's labor laws have considered the necessary efforts to prevent the laborer from being expelled, and there is a big difference whit the new laws to compare the prior ones, however in many cases it is almost impossible to separate and break down those laws in illegal and unfounded expels.