QUARTERLY OF LEGAL ENCYCLOPEDIAS
Year:2020 | Volume:3 | Issue:6|Papers Count:9

Despite the development and prevalence of the term “ civil liability” in Iranian law, some serious questions exist or remain concerning its meaning and domain. In our traditional law and jurisprudence, there have been various decrees and rules about infliction of corporal and financial damages to a third party in the forms of the rule of destruction, blood money, guarantee, usurpation, and nuisance. In each of these subjects, the conditions for creating liability and its effects are independent and different from the others. However, the civil liability law, in its modern and coherent meaning, has general and coherent decrees, rules and conditions. In fact, the civil liability law, as an independent legal institution, deals with all the topics and instances of compensation in a unified and organized manner. Even in certain cases, such as the obligation to make a payment and compensation of moral damages, that do not occupie a significant position in Islamic jurisprudence, are included within the framework of these general topics and conditions. Considering the sovereignty of Islamic jurisprudence over the modern Iranian law following the Islamic Revolution, it is necessary to define the civil liability law and determine its connection to the jurisprudential decrees and sections in a manner that it does not lead to misinterpretation and disharmony with jurisprudential decrees and misunderstanding of Islamic jurisprudence. This article tries to deal with this important issue. This article tries to deal with this important issue.

In this article, the principles of corporal injury compensation in nuclear accidents are studied through a comparative study of French law and international conventions. The purpose of this study was to provide a model for establishing a special system of compensation for corporal injury in nuclear accidents in Iranian law. The main question in advanced legal systems is what is the basis of civil liability in case of nuclear accidents, and what principles does compensation for victims of nuclear accidents follow. Through a descriptive-analytical research method and by studying the subject in French law and international documents, we came to the conclusion that civil liability in nuclear accidents is directed towards the nuclear exploiter and the liability is not based on fault; Rather, even the reasons for the exemption from liability are very limited, and perhaps the force majeure and the fault of a third party do not preclude liability for nuclear user. Also, through insurance and liability of the member states of the conventions and the like, an attempt has been made to forecast a fund to compensate for the accidents and its financial resources has been provided. Whereas in Iranian law, liability for nuclear accidents is subject to the general rules of civil liability and does not provide any effective protection to victims of nuclear disasters. Therefore, it is proposed to establish a "special system for compensation for nuclear accidents" focusing on state responsibility and the provision of an independent fund.

Right is of great significance in political, moral and legal realms. Authors belonging to various schools have dealt with different aspects of rights and have attempted to put forward an intellectual system in this regard. Among such endeavors, we can point to studies and intellectual efforts made by Professor Hillel Steiner, a contemporary political philosopher, who emphasizes the existence of a particular correlation and relationship between “ rights” and “ justice” , in such a way that he includes his views and arguments under the category of “ right as a building element of justice” so that he ultimately considers right as an indivisible part of justice. Of course, the relationship between right and justice is derived from the “ co-existence” relationship between rights. The aforementioned theory is based on a “ libertarian” foundation and therefore set justice on the assumption of the basic value of liberty. In this research, we shall delineate Professor Hillel Steiner’ s theory, and then subject it to analyses and criticism.

Merger is one of the ways to increase the efficiency of banks. Merger of companies, including banks, is possible in two forms: simple merger (unilateral) and consolidation (bilateral merger). In the first method, one company merges with another company. The legal personality of the merged company is obliterated by this action and all its debts, property and partners are transferred to the surviving company. In the second method, two or more companies are merged and a new company is formed from their combination. The merger of banks is permitted under the provisions of the Banking Administration Bill. Simple merger of banks is one of the ways to increase the efficiency of banks. There are several legal questions about simple merger of banks that are not explicitly answered in the above bill and other laws governing banks and companies, and should be answered properly by legal analysis. Simple merger of banks increases the capital of the merging bank, this capital increase has certain legal issues and aspects that are not discussed in other forms of capital increase. If the policy of merging the banks of the country is implemented as a solution to increase their efficiency by using the current legal capacity contained in the Bill of the Banking Administration, first the legal aspects of this phenomenon should be analyzed and a clear answer to the ambiguities should be provided. There are four important issues in increasing the registered capital with the issuance of new shares, the verdict of which should be clarified in case of increasing the registered capital due to the simple merger of banks; these issues are: the pre-emptive right of shareholders to buy new shares, the added value of new shares, the method of payment of the nominal amounts of new shares and the exemption of new shares from registration with the Exchange and Securities Organization.

Where a person transfers its property to another by a bilateral contract, and before receiving his/her consideration, transferee dies, well-known opinion of jurists (Fuqaha) believe a right of option to rescind a contract for the creditor, so called ‘ The right of option for the creditor of deceased’ , in case of Sufficiency of assets in the estate to pay debts of the deceased. some of the jurists made this right of option applicable in a case where deceased died in the state of insolvency. After evaluating the views of the jurists and the evidence of aforementioned option, it was concluded that from the well-known jurists’ point of view, the main reason for the right of creditor’ s option is, Sahiha Abi Valad. However, since this Shahiha, to be contra the generality of some of the Qur'anic verses, Sahiha Omar ibn Yazid, the legal principles and the spirit of law, it is not applicable and the option is not considered authentic.

Damage to elements or functions of the ecosystem or to collective use of human beings from the environment, is considered as environmental damage in the French legal system. In such a legal system, the intensity of damage should be significant to be litigable. There is a conflict in respect to the meaning of this damage and also a conflict concerning this restriction in the Code with the generality of the principle that the environmental damage must be compensated. Therefore, the matter has been referred to the constitutional Council. In our domestic law, although studies on environmental damage have been conducted, but most legislative norms concentrate on the concept and specific cases of “ pollution” and our law has leaned towards environmental pollution law instead of compensation for environmental damage law and facilitation of litigation and proof. Moreover, in addition to such internal barriers to environmental compensation such as uncertainty, ambiguity, and time-consuming consequences of destructive or polluting actions, external barriers such as differences in the nature of liability in public and private law, difficulty in establishing causal link and inconsistency of concept of pollution with some specific cases of damages must also be added.