حقوق تطبیقی
سال:1393 | دوره:10 | شماره:102 |تعداد مقالات:15

In today's world, everyone should be held accountable for the act he does. In other words, law considers all individuals responsible for their actions, and in this respect there is no distinction between a legal person and a real person. Given the increasing industrial and economic activities as well as the huge number of dangerous actions caused by these businesses and industries for people and their surroundings, the foundations on civil liability are established in a way and appropriate measures are taken so that no damage will be left uncompensated. In line with this analysis, it won’t be surprising that institutions such as hospitals will be held accountable concerning the damage they may cause to others, given that they are sometimes acting business-like. In the same vein, it is sometimes said that hospitals are responsible regarding the damages they may cause to the environment. On the one hand, hospitals must provide healthy and desired facilities in return for the expenses they charge on the patients, and when they fail to do so, they will be responsible. Now, what is important is the kind and the basis of responsibility in such instances. On the other hand, the responsibility of the hospitals in case of the failure of their staff to do fulfill their duties, and different views regarding the responsibility of a hospital due to the failure and negligence of its personnel including its physicians will be comparatively dealt with in detail and different kinds of responsibilities of hospitals will be reviewed.

Although there are various systems of notarizing, generally we have three kinds of notarizing system in the world. Some countries such as France accepted Latin notaries system in which all the notaries should be graduates of law and they should go through a complex process and are required to take a exams in order to obtain a notary license. It may take some years to get this. Other countries like United States confirm public notary system. In this system obtaining a notary license is not so difficult and it is not necessary for applicants to be graduates of law. The third system is the one accepted in Iran and some other countries and it is a combination of two systems. They follow some of the strict procedures of the Latin system, but they do not follow it fully.

While there are similarities between delegation and conferment of agency, they are different from each other. Delegation is basically a subdivision of the principal agency and it may be influenced by death or incapacity of the first agent and in some cases honorarium of the second agent may be incumbent upon the first agent, but given that in conferment of agency there is a document indicating so, the conferment of agency takes place on the basis of a contract as a result of which there will be a transfer of contractual positions, replacement of the first agent by the second agent and finally transfer of rights and obligations of the first agent to the second agent. Also, pursuance of agents and irrevocable delegation are different in them. In this article, we try to offer a comparative analysis between the Islamic law, Iranian law and English law.

Despite increase in the use of liability insurances, the legal nature of such contracts is not clear. The justification of impact of this contract on the contracting parties and the injured third parties is only possible by understanding the nature of such contracts. Inapplicability of the general rules of contracts in liability policies such as the obligation of the insurer in paying compensation to the injured third parties even when the insured causes damage intentionally and other instances which cannot be justified relying on general rules, all indicate that the nature of these insurance contracts must be looked at on their own. Although, like England, in Iran we can speak of an obligation in favor of a third party and paying damage attributed to the insured, it seems that the nature of the contract is the compulsory liability, guarantee of the compensation for the injured by the rule of law and within the insurance contract.

The study attempts to answer whether strategies of social and cultural “destruction” should be considered “genocide” under international law in the absence of systematic killing, or at least widespread physical attack. Given that at the moment cultural genocide is not within the scope of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, this study makes it clear that physical or biological acts are not the only ways to annihilate a group. It is possible to wipe out a human group without actually killing its members, i.e. by destroying its language and religious institutions and objects, restricting traditional practices, persecuting its clerics and intellectuals, in short, by destroying its cultural heritage. There have been many cases of cultural genocide throughout contemporary history, for example by Israeli government against Palestinians. To ignore this means to deny the protection of fundamental human rights of those who need it the most.

Humanitarian Assistance means the provision of commodities and materials for humanitarian purposes typically in response to humanitarian crises including natural and man made disasters such as armed conflicts. The primary objective of H.A is to protect lives of victims- reduce their suffering and maintain human dignity.Whenever there is a disaster and affected state is unable or unwilling to provide aid to victims within its own territory -there is an important question whether other states have a duty to provide h.a. to victims even without its consent. this is strongly related to rights of victims to receive h.a. ascertaining whether victims of natural or man made disasters have right to receive h.a.is problematic .To address this increasingly significant problem this paper has argued that morally and legally victims have right to receive but states are not legally under an obligation to provide h.a.to victims of natural disasters and armed conflicts. On the other hand, under international humanitarian law states are committed to accept h.a.in armed conflicts.

The principles of real and commutative justice and the real and inner intention are the most fundamental bases of contemporary modern law of contract, and are of great importance in the jurisprudence and function as guiding principles in the complicated cases. This study seeks to apply these principles to one of the hard and controversial ceases in Iranian contract law - revocable transactions. Analyzing three important views about the outcome of this transaction, this study tries to compromise between these views in favor of a real and objective justice, assuming that the theory of validity will be applied to the natural state of revocable transactions in such a way that it is consistent with the requirements of both the ideal justice and formal view and that invalidity theory being considered as applicable in cases where there is diversion from the principle of commutative justice and shared inner intention, and the possibility of judicially finding out what the real intent is drawing on the evidence and the principles. It will be explained from jurisprudential point of view that the requirements of realistic justice in complicated and preferred cases will be based on realization school in law of contracts. This will be so in order to avoid using the original nature of such transaction and the principle of freedom of contract as a tool to impose unjust contracts on vulnerable party.