LEGAL STUDIES (JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES OF SHIRAZ UNIVERSITY)
Year:2019 | Volume:11 | Issue:2 |Papers Count:9

According to Article 237 of the act of “ The insertion of articles into the standing order of the parlimant” , dated 26/6/2018, the President has been assigned witht the obligation to report on plans he introduces when at the time of the formation of the government and the vote of the confidence of the ministers. This research attempts to answer this question whether the president's duty to report to the parliament on annual performance is in accordiance with the constitution? And on the assumption that this president's duty is contrary to article 57 of the constitution and the necessity of a narrow interpretation of the parliamentary supervision is reinforced, On this basis, it is suggested that in order to eliminate this legal requirement, before it change into a constitutional custom, this matter must be submitted to the “ High Council for the Resolve of Disputes and the Establishment of Relations of the Three Powers” by the President.

While developing states still insist on the issue of economic governance to confront the developed countries positions or to maintain their own positions, the international legal realities indicate that mere reliance on the concept of “ economic independence” and “ permanent sovereignty over natural resources” cannot be a practical way to achieve the ideals of the so called developing countries. Sovereignty like Damocles sword can pave the way for maintaining the “ status quo” or domination of premier economical powers in the international equations. While examnng the not-so-positive role of sovereignty on the procedure of setting relations between developing and developed states, this artciel attempts to emphasize the fact that balancing of existing economical unfair relations between north and south will not be possible, save by making inroads into the traditional concept of economical governance, the concept formed by developing states in 1960s and 1970s. Based on this, the present research tackles the question of what is position of the economic sanctions in opposition the traditional concepts of sovereignty and independence of states with the concepts and facts of the current international legal order?

The condition of omission in the Iranian legal system indicate a contractual term by which a party to contract undertakes not to take an action. The purpose of this research is to identify the effect of this clause. In this regard, it must be remarked that the solution of annulment as stipulated Articles 454 and 455 of the Civil Code does not count as a general rule. Also, it must be noted that in property contracts, the issue of omission has raised a variety of conflicting positions on the part of the legal scholarship. This essay tackles the question of how we can approach the issue of omission as a condition in contracts without stepping into frustrating the contract. In so doing, a number of general principles will be invoked and discussed.

Clearing house is one of the important and basic institutions in the financial derivatives market. This house has been designed in such ways that not only minimize breaches by dealers of their contracts, but also ensures the security and certainty in the market and facilitates the transactions to be settled. This article aims to raise more awareness on the part of the legal community on the functions and roles of the clearing house in the market. Therefore, we will first discuss the house function in the market and how it intervenes in it and then will compare its nature with such legal institutions as open offer, agency, guarantee and novation and finally will conclude that despite some similarities between these institutions, the house nature differs from them in many respects.

Intellectual property rights system acts in support of intellectual works by instruments such as Paris, Bern and the agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS). In parallel, international foreign-investment law system acts in support of foreign investors through bilateral treaties of foreign investment. A notable question is if foreign intellectual works can be supposed as "foreign capital" and if so, what is the scope and instances of IPs protections? In response we shall distinguish protections offered by IPs legal system from those of BITs. Because there is some deferences in protected items list, duration of protection and national-international protection of foreign IPs. It seems that foreign intellectual works can be an example of "foreign capital" under the bilateral treaties of foreign investment. In this way, the protection of owners of the intellectual works would be more than what is endowed by TRIPS agreement. In other words, such guarantees as national treatment, most favourd nation treatment (MFN) in as well as fair and equitable treatment and arbitration clause are added to TRIPS protections for owners of intellectual works. The most notable protection offered by the BIT system is the prohibition of expropriation. This research identifies such guarantees and examines them through the lens of the TRIPS and BIT system.

An open contract, the provisions of which are set out in the Uniform Commercial Code, entitled "Completed Terms", is a contractual framework whereby some issues are redone at the time of concluding, and based on the practices in Legal systems are completed and certain contracts can be made. Thus, in terms of the legal nature of the contract, its analysis based on the legal relationship between the pre-contractual agreement or the preliminary agreement appears to be incorrect. These contracts are binding on the parties and can be invoked against third persons. This essay argues that open contracts are governed by a number of consensual-based rules and therefore, are acceptable in the Iranian legal system.

The relationship between water and human beings has always had a dual nature. On the one hand, it is human and his life that is preserved by water and on the other hand, conservation of quantity and quality of existing fresh waters on the Earth depends on human activities. With intensifying water crisis in the world, attempts to eliminate it and establish a state of water security have become one of the major concerns of the international community. The main issue is that whether international law has been able to oblige States to provide water security? In this study, this issue is examined by using library data and descriptive-analytical method. Studies show that although international law has not addressed the issue of water security directly; but on the basis of general principles of international law, we can infer obligations and impose requirements on States and thus, remedy the vacuum on water security. This study maps out such principles in order to sketch a framework for the governing rules of water security in international law.

Nowadays, the selection of governing law and competent court in international commercial agreements to resolve the future disputes is acceptable. Nevertheless, The problems and ambiguities regarding the exclusive jurisdiction clauses are considerable because, in some legal systems, the law-makers have not announced their views about these agreements and required conditions for concluding them. This essay seeks to examine the concept of jurisdiction clause private international law and describe the governing principles in this regard. The main question is: which conditions are necessary for making the jurisdiction agreement in international disputes? It seems the conditions expressed in Article 190 of Iranian Civil Code for making valid contracts, considering the requirements of such agreement are necessary in jurisdiction agreement.

Some of the decisions and opinions of International Court of Justice have raised the question whether The Court can refuse to make a decision by declaring non liquet for reasons such as lack of clarification, adequacy or lack of applicable law? Some experts provide a positive answer to this question with reference to The Court's opinion in paragraph 105(2)(e) of the advisory opinion on the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons (1996). Given the crucial role of The Court in resolving the disputes as an effective means of peaceful dispute settlement between states, which undoubtedly contribute towards the maintenance of international peace and security, it would appear that the Court could not refuse to make a decision by declaring non liquet. The main question that this article deals with is whether, in accordance with the statute, rules and principles applicable in The Court as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, and in accordance with its case law, The Court may refuse to make a decision by declaring non liquet?