QUARTERLY OF LEGAL ENCYCLOPEDIAS
Year:2020 | Volume:3 | Issue:7|Papers Count:8

In addition to the will of the parties and objective criteria in determining the law applicable to the current relationships in the international letter of credit, the disciplinary rules are among the factors influencing in the determination of the law applicable to the said relations. In the current conditions of trade, especially in the international arena, it is observed that the relations of activists in this field have gone beyond the boundaries of private relations and certain considerations related to the public interest have also been imposed on these relations. In this situation, the judge or arbitrator in determining the applicable law to the current relations in the letter of credit, in addition to validating the will of the parties and the existing objective criteria, also pays attention to public interest. In determining the applicable law in cases where the will of the parties or the objective criteria of law of a country determine as an applicable law to the legal relationship, the disciplinary rules currently applying in other legal systems related to that legal relationship in the letter of credit should also be considered. Therefore, in determining the law applicable to a legal relationship, the judge or arbitrator prevents the law determined based on the will of the parties or objective criteria, ignoring the disciplinary rules of the countries related to that legal relationship.

At the headquarters of each civil registry office, a board called the "Dispute Resolution Board" has been formed to deal with the errors in the personal status documents and make a decision to fix them and deal with the correction, completion, change and cancellation of the personal status documents mentioned in Article 3 of the Civil Registration Act. The proceeding in the Board is conducted by submission of the application by the holders of the personal status documents or the beneficiaries or the registrars. The Dispute Resolution Board occupied a better position than other specialized administrative authorities in terms of observing the principles of a fair trial due to having a special procedure under the title of "Rules of Procedure of the Dispute Resolution Boards on Civil Registry" In this article, we will examine the organization, territorial and subject matter jurisdiction, the principles governing the proceeding in Dispute Resolution Board and its procedure.

Arbitration in the Works of professor Jafari Langroudi The works of Dr. Mohammad Jaafar Jafari Langroudi are considered as a precious literary, jurisprudential and legal collection. In this article, among the various legal institutions that were considered by him, we shall analyze the topic of “ arbitration” in his works. The first section of the article is devoted to the substantive rules of arbitration, in which elements of arbitration are discussed. In one of his works, he explains and interprets elements of arbitration, including the parties involved, the granting of mediation authority to the arbitrator and prohibition of mediation in criminal affairs and retribution. A brief history of arbitration is also mentioned in the first section of the article. In one of his books, the Professor describes the position and history of mediation in Islam, the conduct of the Infallible Imams and the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and the time and manner of the advent of the institution of arbitration in Iran. Then, part of this section continues with a comparison of arbitration with the institution of the bar. In the same section safeguards for non-compliance with the conditions for validity of the contract or the condition of arbitration are set forth. Arbitration by a legal entity which is discussed in the category of the substantive rules of arbitration, is considered justified in the works of Dr Langroudi. With respect to the validity of the arbitrator’ s award, in case there are several arbitrators, the Professor also considers valid the opinion of the majority, and considers the arbitration null and void in case there are two arbitrators and they fail to agree. The second section of the article deals with procedural rules in the arbitration domain. In another section of the article, the professor’ s works have been analyzed concerning objection to arbitration award and the procedure to file an application to set aside the award in question. In respect to termination of arbitration, Dr. langroudi believes that it is possible to withdraw from arbitration by resorting to certain evidence and circumstances.

Effect of a “ Unilateral Mistake” on the survival of a contract is one of the controversial subjects of Contract Law. In Iranian law, “ a unilateral mistake” that has entered the realm of compromise and is about “ the subject of the transaction itself” invalidates the contract, regardless of its effect on efficiency and allocation of resources. In English law, a unilateral mistake affects the life of the contract, which damages one of the basic elements of the contract and the other party is aware or should be aware of it. According to legal economic analysts, "unilateral mistake" should be examined in terms of efficiency and its impact on resource allocation, and "mistake" affects the fate of the contract if it prevents the realization of the allocated efficiency. Because in Iranian and English law, the rules governing "unilateral mistake" do not take into account whether the goods or services have been transferred to the person who values them the most, the allocated efficiency will not be achieved.

Good faith is one of the current tools in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties concerning treaty interpretation. The numerous international treaties, including WTO agreements, have been interpreted in the light of this element. Despite the frequent use of this concept in the treaty interpretation, the exact limits of the meanings and instances of good faith in the process of interpretation are controversial. WTO Dispute Resolution Bodies have repeatedly resorted to good faith in interpretation of Organization’ s agreements. The diverse concepts and applications of good faith have led the WTO’ s Appellate Body and Panel to use good faith in two very different concepts in interpreting treaties. The result of this conflict is to produce the different interpretations regarding the rights and obligations of parties of WTO’ s agreements. This article, while explaining the different meanings of good faith in public and economic international law, and especially its application in the process of interpretation of treaties, examines the differences between WTO Dispute Resolution bodies’ approaches. Finding of this article shows that the Appellate’ approach is more consistent with the logic of interpretation in international law.

Terrorist crimes are not a new concept in the legal literature. However, due to the tragedies that took place, especially the events of September 11, 2001, it has received special attention in the field of international law. One of the important effects of combating these crimes is the dominance of securitism over fair judgment, which in the light of this approach, governments prefer to prosecute perpetrators of terrorist acts outside the rules of international law. Therefore, in this regard, the citizenship rights of the accused are endangered. Therefore, the solution is contrary to the security-oriented approach. However, the violation of the citizenship rights of those accused of terrorist crimes and the discriminatory trial based on the violation of principles do not lead to the guarantee the security. As terrorist incidents spread in today's world. A review of the principles of criminal law, the constitutions of various countries and numerous international human rights conventions shows the need to respect the citizenship rights of all defendants. Our aim in this article is to consider and study these rights and their guarantees-by the method of description and analysis-in the stage of investigation with a comparative study of Iranian, British and Egyptian law and the result is that the rights of the accused in international conventions and the Constitutions has been explicitly guaranteed and the inalienable principles of criminal law also confirm this, so the violation of citizenship rights under the pretext of combating terrorism is not acceptable.