Islamic jurisprudence Resaerch
Year:2019 | Volume:14 | Issue:4|Papers Count:8

The foundations of intellectual property are one of the most challenging issues of legal knowledge in the present era. Accordingly, the role and place of intellectual property in economic and commercial exchanges has led to a conflict between contemporary jurisprudents and philosophers of law. The aim of this article is to examine the theorizing in this area of legal knowledge that develops the foundations of intellectual property. The result of this paper is that the viewpoints of supporters of intellectual property in relation to the rules governing these property and assuming ownership of intellectual property are property, so, based on the rule of lawlessness and rationality, the views of the proponents of the legitimacy of intellectual property in the law of the law in the current circumstances Support is known.

According to the theory of determination of the right of retaliation, the avengers of blood in murder have only the right of retaliation and demanding monetary compensation depends on the killer’ s satisfaction. But according to the alternative theory of the right of retaliation, the avengers of blood are free to choose between retaliation and monetary compensation and the killer is obliged to do whatever the avenger chooses. Although, the determination theory is well-known in Amanieh Fiqh, its reasons and argument do not have enough integrity and reason and is opposed by practical issues such as wasting the blood of victim and not respecting the interests of heirs. Although the legislator in the Islamic Penal Code 2013 complies with the terms of Fiqh jurists and relies on determination theory, but in the derivatives of the problem, in order to solve some practical problems, it has violated the requirements of the theory and follows a dual criterion; however, it has not been able to solve all the problems and the negative consequences of this theory; This article tries to criticize the foundations of the determination theory of the right to retaliation and reminds its practical problems.

According to Article 3 of the establishment and the powers of Haj and Endowments and Charity Affairs Organization, endowed property does not cease to property insurancebut after the dedication it is the legal entity endowment which is considered the owner and just the endowments property have the right to exploit it. This new theory provided by legislator is derived from a number of scholars believe that the transfer of ownership endowment is only to God and others including Imam Khomeini had the endowment without its ownership. These two viewpoints, have provided the background formation of theory. The present study is to investigate the background of the provider of this theory, requirements for proving this theory and barriers to scrutinize it. The authors believe that no only these two viewpoints are improbable as background provider of theory for owned legal person but by supporting this theory, it has two obstacles: first in spite of the fact that Imam Khomeini’ s issues about rejecting the famous theory of scholars indicating transferring of ownership to endowment property are acceptable, but other reasoning should also be taken into consideration and also it is not possible to accept concubine according to dedicated contract theory.

Weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, biological and microbiological. An important feature of these weapons of destruction and seamless web of goals. Jurists unanimously expressed preliminary ruling in respect of the production and use of these weapons have issued. Including secondary titles that sentence is Tghyrdhndh rule is retaliation. Basis of reciprocity is that the same should be proportionate to the aggression. However, according to Islamic law the legitimacy of defensive measures to be another place that leads to aggression. A second rule is necessary other topics related to the creation of the task must be lifted up and The result is a license to commit an unlawful act. What is the Islamic religious principles, and it is understandable that the use of these weapons is not permitted under the headings secondary. If the purpose of the submission of the enemy through his battle with security forces, those who do not contribute to the injury, damage and innocent people will talm that it is useless, unnecessary and inhumane and is not proportional to military necessity.

The Jurisprudential and legal analysis between involved parties in mortgage-backed securities-as an important financial instrument for banks and credit institutions-needs to be explained. Since Issuer and Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) are the main parties involved, the relation between them is of utmost importance. Our legal concept candidates here are debt sale, novation, and transfer of claim. Some of the Islamic lawyers disagree with some of the assumptions of debt sale so that reaching an agreement is not likely here. Besides problems with its form and content, novation has the problem of all its guaranties being canceled once the first obligation is so, and we need new guaranties which make novation less practical. Transfer of claim seems more applicable than others because in addition to having the advantages of other candidates has the advantage of all legal guaranties being transferable without borrower’ s permission

Testimony testifying to voluntary and unpardoned martyrdom, if it is sought to prove the right to claim, acceptance of that position is contrary to jurisprudents. Famous jurists have absolutely rejected this testimony. Considering that testimony is one of the most practical proofs of proof, and considering that there is actually a lot of evidence that it is evidence of the process of ignorance, and in this way it is testifying in a way that the testimony is to be ignored, Many cases are related to judicial justice and a factor for justifying the right of the claimant. Therefore, the present study is descriptive-analytic to criticize and review the well-known evidence of rejection of martyrdom. The findings show that the well-known reason is not qualified to prove their claims. On the other hand, the rejection of martyrdom is completely absurd, and on the other hand, accepting martyrdom.

the position civil lawanswering the questions whether the divorce the couple's special rights is a completely personal matter, in which the stewardship of the couple is in that condition. And it is not possible to do it by another. Is the delegation and sovereignty of divorce permitted from the point of view of jurisprudence and the Iranian legal system, and what is the approval of the divorce's marriage license? In response to these well-known questions, Imamiyya jurisprudents have acknowledged that although a divorce has been paid by a divorced person to a couple, however, this can be justified and the couple can assign it to a third party or a wife; if the civil law The same comment has been accepted. In contrast to the famous belief in Imamiyya jurisprudents and, consequently, Iranian civil law does not allow the divorce to be given to a wife and the divorce is not in the form of divorce, while in accepting the principle of the giving and divorce, there is no difference between the public jurists. Therefore, after reviewing the meaning and concept of delegation and soakil, the authors have reviewed their permission in jurisprudence and legal system of Iran.

This article is explaining the "Companionship of Hearts" principle (i. e. Ta’ lif ah Qulub) on one side which unbelievers or weak belief Muslims are kindly treated, in order to be recruited in holy war (jihad) or to be attract in Islam and Muslims, or to create unity among Muslims and to protect Islamic government. On the other side meanwhile studying this sentence in the absence of imam and mention of the juridical proofs in this case resulted that this sentence is executable also with possibility of holy war (jihad) happening and in spite of Islam development and also assumption of non-formation of Islamic government. Therefore this article has argued extent of performance of this principle in different cases of religious jurisprudence and has mentioned contents as examples which jurists cited them in their books. Discussed principle is applied in important cases such as tithe (Zakat), Devotion, toleration dissimulate, safety. The methodology in this research is descriptive-analytic method.