CULMINATION OF LOW
Year:2018 | Volume:1 | Issue:1 |Papers Count:7

There are two approaches at explaining the oblique intention. The objectivists make the criterion From the perspective of society. The criterion for considering those verbs and sciences that cause to the result of murder. at the face, the subjectivist still holds the accused and emphasizes his mental states. Imamieh jurisprudence has used objective criterion. But these Jurisprudents have cited examples and have not given a certain criterion for classifying these types of verbs. The Penal Code of Iran has added to this ambiguity, and in Article 144 it has not explicitly stated in what circumstances Knowledge to Occurrence of the outcome is subjected to article 144, consequently subject to clause (a) of article 290, and under what conditions the Knowledge to Occurrence of the outcome is Subjected to paragraph (b) of this Article. The present research has been designed to explain the oblique intent in common law as an objective system and determined the conditions for realizing each of these Articles using objective criteria. In this context, it explains how subjectivists consider oblique intention in a mental system such as Germany, which does not use objective and societal criteria.

Criminalizing the act of aiding to unintentional crimes appears to be onerous; especially with regard to the legal texts of the Iranian law system, thus addressing the issue requires a theoretical discussion on the substantiation of its possibility within a consistent structure. In this direction, initially, the prerequisites of the recognition of the theory on aiding to unintentional crimes such as “ non-essentiality of the corroboration of the unity of the criminal intent of parties” , “ the actuality of the title of aiding” , “ non-essentiality of the intentionality of the aided act” are explored thoroughly, then through the analysis and review of its contradicting instances, such as “ aiding to the commission of a conduct which is the origin of the crime” , “ assistance in the commission of the killing by mistake” and “ intervention in the murder of a person deemed erroneously mahdour-al dam (or deserving of death)” , there exists the grounds to explain the criminological advantages derived from acceptance of the aforementioned theory, and at last, it is proposed to the legislator to expand the instances of aiding to the commission of crime as an effective measure to control delinquency.

The Code of Criminal Procedure approved (2013), like its previous regulation, without mentioning the conditions of realization of the rule of authority of criminal res judicata, has identifi ed this rule in the row of one of the nolle prosequi. The relative transparency of the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law in this regard, and the theory of the possibility to resort the rules of civil procedure in the silent provision of criminal procedure, the theory of unity has strengthened the conditions of realization of rule of authority of criminal res judicata. In the meantime, judiciary law seems to have tendency to follow the views of many lawyers in accepting this theory, while the territory and scope in which this rule is allowed to apply and enforced in terms of its characteristics and its fundamental and inherent differences play an essential role in identifying each of the conditions for the application of the rule discussed. This research, based on an accurate scientifi c analysis and through the use of descriptive-analytical method, has achieved the following results 1-The analysis of authority of criminal res judicata based on foundations and civil analysis is methodologically based on a tremendous mistake and leads to unrealistic and non-scientifi c results. 2-The most appropriate method for analyzing the authority of criminal res judicata is to assess the triple conditions of the unity of the claimants, the unity of subject and the unity of cause with regard to the distinction aspects of criminal domain compared to civil fi elds, the issue that leads to a conception other than the inference.

One of the remonstrative enactment laws in the fi eld of immovable property is the Article 62 of the Permanent Rules of the Program for Development of Country Code, approved on 29-1-2017 that has encouraged many people to invalidate the offi cial documents and instability in bank dealings. The ambiguities in this legal article, causes disagreements in the judicial system; The status of normal transfer In terms of authenticity or inaccuracy, inclusion of this article to contracts, Protecting the third parties with good faith, The concept of religious validity versus the legal reliability, The ability to annul the offi cial documents and how to prevent these documents from being unstable. The above mentioned facts are the most important questions concerning (about) this provision. This article tries to analyze the matters of article 62 and presents the solutions to combat with the irrational and destructive appearance of this article and the strengthens of the former judicial procedure in order to defending the offi cial documents and the non-cited concept of common documents strengthens and suggests to the judicial procedure.

The principles of fair trial require that the right to appeal would be recognized. In most judgements, therefore, losing party can appeal in the higher court. In the case of multiplicity of unsuccessful parties, according to the privity of civil judgements, the decision does not affect those who have not appealed, unless it is indivisible. In contrast, if winning parties are multiple, the severability of judgement is the criteria for necessity or non-necessity of appealing against them. In addition to, appellant can withdraw his appeal claim form; provided that the judgement is not divisible, withdrawal of appeal in respected of some respondent amounted to dismissal of case by court; whereas if one of the appellants withdraw his appeal against respondent, it is an obstacle to trial and it is similar to the situation when he does not appeal. In the case of multiplicity of losing parties and prevailing party, the delicate issues are arisen that will be examined.

Private property developments have not been able to completely alter the rights inherent in private property, but private ownership has been subject to Limitations. One example of these limitations, which has been neglected in legal researches, is the issue of eminent domain by the State for private use rather than public use. The question is essentially whether there is a possibility of eminent domain for private use. The eminent domain by the state for private use, contrary to the Eminent Domain in public use, is not easily acceptable and may face challenges, since the public interest in the private use hardly imaginable. However, after a careful examination of the eminent domain for private use, to be clear that the limitation of property is a public interest, the challenge is moderated and, as a result, is acceptable in our legal system. The present research, while accepting the possibility of eminent domain by the State for private use, explains the terms and effects of this type of limitation of property, and recommends that the legislature, in addition to proposing some amendments to the rules, prescribed eminent domain by State to consider these rules.

International law because of its special nature, in large part owes its formation and development from the ideas, writings and works of international law experts. However, doctrine as one of the sources of international law has been considered less from other sources. Doctrine, both conceptually and functionally Faced with enormous changes over time and and according to the conditions in each period has experienced different positions. This article reviews these developments throug trying to fi nd the place of doctrin among the sources of international law. Results from this study suggests that the doctrine has been found today in the form of collective teachings and despite the time of the birth of international law was seen as the premier source of international law, the role it plays today is more untangible and subtle. Although it still enjoys a special place in the evolution of international law.