ISLAMIC LAW RESEARCH JOURNAL
Year:2016 | Volume:16 | Issue:2 (42) |Papers Count:7

ILO since 1948 took measures in promoting and protecting freedom of association and obligations of governments to respect the rights and freedom of unions. But some of these measures have been consistently opposed by the governments. The purpose of this paper is to criticize approach and basis of ILO in obligating governments to respect freedom of association. ILO is based on the doctrine of implied powers and interpreted constitution accordance with the goals and objectives and established committee freedom of association. This ILO's action is contrast to the 1969 Vienna Convention. Originality will doctrine should be placed on the interpretation of constitution and the Constitution should be restricted interpretation.The basic Nature of freedom of association is human rights and if we analyze it in this regard, public order will restrict its application scope in practice.

Lawyers and jurists always study intention as essential element in contracts and onesided dispositions and also indagate its relevant issues but they have never focus on it as an effective element in inheritance neither independently nor dependently because they assume rules governing inheritance as peremptory norms. In this paper we try to prove that a person can change rules governing inheritance by will indirectly. In other words we believe that will is able to change this rules within its authority because there is not any conflict between will and inheritance. Furthermore some of lawyers and jurists in some cases have accepted effects resulting from such wills. Thus we investigate different forms of will (for example deprivation from inheritance or changing share of inheritance and et cetera) witch practically lead to this change.Relating to this, lawmaker, lawyers and jurists' point of view also will be mentioned and subsequently assessed.

One of the important issues in the law of contract is the impact of third-parties cooperation with the contractual promisor in breach of his obligations. In legal systems of France and Belgium, the third-party cooperation in breach of contractual obligations, has been considered to be the cause of civil liability. This research with an analytical, logical and comparative method, meanwhile explaining the Basics, conditions and effects of aforesaid liability in legal systems of France and Belgium, has investigated the viewpoint of In legal system of Iran. Based on the results of this research, in French doctrine and precedent, joint and several liability of the promisor and the third-party is the theory accepted for the compensation of the damages caused to the promise. Moreover, in the case of contracts that the third-party concludes with the promisor in order to breach his obligations, non-opposability or annulment of aforesaid contracts has been propounded as the appropriate way to restore the previous situation. In legal system of Iran unenforceability of aforementioned contracts is acceptable. It is also defensible to suppose the promisor and the third-party equally liable toward the contractual promise for the damages resulting, unless their conduct efficacy is different.

From the apparent meaning of the section 1046 of the Civil Code, it is inferred that the venue of the effect of foster-relationship is limited to relative-relation prohibitions. It means each marriage that is banned in venue of the relative-relations, the foster parallel and equivalence is void and unlawful as well. The amount of this effect, however, is in question. The major question of this article is whether all sorts of foster parallel of marriage are unlawful as their relative-relation ones are void, or it is possible to consider some restrictions in a way that there is a case, in which the relative marriage is unlawful, but it does not have any obstacle or prohibition in the foster one. In the other words, is pointing to foster-relation in the honorable speech of “Anything is banned by relative-relation is also banned by foster-relation.” merely referred to unlawful expressed topics in Islamic texts? Or does it include the other unmentioned topics, albeit there is no hesitation in correctness of the same relative-relation type? The outcome of this research is the restriction and monopoly of foster prohibition in particular cases of relative-relation prohibitions. Hence, there are cases in which in spite of the prohibition in relative-relation marriage, the foster parallel and equivalence does not include that prohibition.

In accordance with Article 196 of the Iranian Civil Code, "Anyone contracts for himself, unless the contrary of this is stipulated in contract or to be proved in future". Iranian law scholars have interpreted this provision to two different species. Some know that as confirming the theory of the “apparent will” and claim that the exception set forth in this article only regulated the legal relationship between the representative and principal, not the legal relationship between the representative and contractor. Therefore, the legal relationship between the representative and the principal is not citable against the unaware person. History of Shiite jurisprudence confirms it, too. While others believe that the exception set forth in this article only regulated the legal relationship between the representative and the contractor and the relationship between the representative and the principal is citable against him as well, although he is unaware. The first interpretation is based on the theory of the apparent will that it is rooted in the need to public policy and the second interpretation is based on the freedom of contracts. This article seeks to examine both the interpretation and the reasons for them in Iran with emphasis on the proper interpretation of Shiite jurisprudence and recognize the best. At the end of this article the second view is accepted.

Each of law schools is defining the "right" based on its epistemological foundations. In "legal positivism" the term of "right" is separate from any norms and values and only spoke the "ruler command" as the "right" because of the impossibility of an empirical science in value judgment and the claim of “the separation “is” from “ought to”. But in Islamic law the term "right" is apart from "ruler command" (law) and different and the "ruler command" (law) must be based on "right".Because norms and values has objective criterion, which provides the ability to measure their truth or falsity based on no monopoly of science in experimental science. And thus, the norms and values is going to a subset of science. Although there are some similarities between Islamic Law and Some branches of natural law regarding to the concept of "right" and may sometimes lead to the same conclusions in some branches, they are different in some results and modality of explanations and descriptions. The "right" in Islamic thought is "what is entirely consistent with real rules and objectives of universe". On the other hand, what is entirely consistent with real rules and objectives of universe, is "Sharia". Thus, the concept of "right" is inextricably linked with real rules and objectives of universe on the view of fixity and "Sharia" on the view of proof.

There is no precedent for the use of patent without patentee’s consent in jurisprudence. This article tries to make a connection between regulations of hoarding and patenting through criterion unity through which the regulation of hoarding could be applied to patentee who abstains production, without holding to invalid analogy in jurisprudence. Also, this article tries to extend hoarding cases to goods beyond foods, resorting to cause of divine ordinance.Next, the process of putting price on goods and patents are discussed and is proved that the government has the authorization to put price on patents. In international documents using patent without consent is authorized within limits.In Iranian code, patent act has allowed the government to exploit patent without the consent of patentee within defined limits. It seems that jurisprudence and law sources about the subject of this article are limited and require more research and scrutiny.