The legality of a financial compensation given to the creditor in case of non -payment of a debt in due time is a matter of discord. Before the Islamic Revolution, whether in case of loan or mortgage, the legal amount of this compensation reached 12%. After the Revolution, the Council of Guardians based itself on previous fat was to announce that such a claim was illegal from a religious point of view. But in fact, considering that this compensation is not an extra amount of money given in addition of the original loan, but a way to cover the losses created by the delay in refunding the creditor and a fine for not respecting the principle which stipulates that "the Muslims fulfill their contracts", this claim is legal and does not infringe on the rules and principles of jurisprudence.

Introduction: Due to the unfavorable condition of sport infrastructure in Iran, including locations, equipment, facilities, and accessories, athletes and coaches are at an increased risk of accidents and injuries. One of the main tools for protecting athletes in case of accidents is insurance. The objective of this study was to determine the status of sports insurance from the perspective of injured athletes and sports administrators in Chaharmahal Va Bakhtiyari Province, Iran.Methods: This applied and descriptive study was conducted through field surveys in 2014. The study population consisted of injured sport administrators and athletes in Chaharmahal va Bakhtiari Province (64 managers and 278 athletes). From among them, 103 athletes and 42 officials were selected through convenience sampling. The data gathering tool was a researchermade questionnaire consisting of two parts; one part related to the success rate of insurance plans and the other on problems and obstacles to a successful insurance coverage. The validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by sports management professionals, sports medicine experts, and insurance management experts. Its reliability was calculated using Cronbach’s alpha which was equal to 0.84. Data analysis was carried out using descriptive and inferential statistics.Results: From the managers’ perspective, the Federation of Sports’ Medicine has not shown a significantly favorable performance in regards to mandatory sports’ insurance. Moreover, from the athletes’ perspective, the Federation of Sports’Medicine has only been significantly successful in the prevention dimension (P<0.05).Conclusion: Based on the findings of this study, the Federation of Sports’ Medicine, as the organization responsible for the development of technical and medical services in sports, must create favorable conditions for success in the treatment and prevention of sports related incidents and provision of administrative services.

This article is an extension of the Eslamloueyan (2015). One of the key findings of that research is that the profit doesn't need to belong to only one production factor, but other inputs can also share in the profit. In addition, the economic principle that those who bear the risks are entitled to profit does not contradict Islamic viewpoints. Using a simple model, we compare the distribution system based on fixed payment to the profit-loss sharing system under uncertainty. Additionally, our framework allows us to examine Ayatollah Sadr's theory regarding the share of the Mamluk material owner in production. We argue that there is no difference between the fixed payments and the profit-loss sharing methods to compensate the services of production factors in the equilibrium under the certainty case. However, when there is uncertainty, our results suggest that replacing the fixed payment system with a profit-loss sharing system is more compatible with distributive justice and better maintains human dignity. Hence, to better compensate for the services of different factors of production, governments should take specific measures to promote a profit-loss-sharing system. Our findings might be used to develop a theory of profit for an economic system with an Islamic perspective.

The increase in the inflation rate in Iran and the decrease in the value of the currency have raised the issue of determining scope of the unauthorized seller's guarantee of payment of compensation. There is no dispute about the need to pay the price from the unauthorized seller, but the differences of opinion are for the time when the value of the goods has increased and the value of the price paid has decreased. To compensate for this unjust loss, there are serious differences between jurists and legal scholars and in the judicial procedure, which requires organizing and reaching a common point to prevent the right of the ignorant buyer. In spite of the issuance of unanimous ruling No. 733 of the Supreme Court, this problem still remains. It seems that paying the price on the day of sale by the unauthorized seller to the customer is closer to justice and fairness because the price increase may exceed the inflation rate of the bank index. Therefore, exchange justice requires the issuance of a judgment based on the value on the day of sale.

The legislator has allowed the governor to give moratorium or installment to the lender based on article 652. If the debt subject be related to the bill, the value of money may decrease. Also, the lender may be deprived from the benefits that could obtain by the use of his money too. There are many different viewpoints among the scholars in relation with being eligible of devaluation and compensation of delayed payment. It seems that devaluation is under the guarantee and purchasing power of money must be respected. But according to article 522, there is no possibility to compensate devaluation. Compensation of delayed payment is not eligible too.

Given Iran’s today economic conditions and change in the prices and devaluation of national currency, it is difficult to have transaction without taking into consideration a penalty for delay in payment of time-bound deals. At the same time, ambiguity about contradiction of this rule with the Sharia has led to suggestion of various stances by legal authorities to the extent that some maintain that penalty for late payment of cash is against the Sharia. Hence, the significance of this issue becomes more important from different perspectives. The present article is an attempt to find out whether the nature of penalty for late payment of cash is different from payment based on the current value of currency and calculation of the inflation rate, or, it is the same. Or, whether the collateral or guarantee fund is a kind of civil penalty for violation of the commitment? Or, whether this collateral or guarantee fund is a kind of penalty compensation for the damage inflicted by the committed person because of violation of his/her commitment?

In order to implementation of public projects which are carried out by the executive systems, apart from the ownership, the owners of the property in the projects’ realm may be affected by the implementation of public projects. The question is whether the executive system can be held liable for such damages? This is one of the most important issues in many countries, which has sometimes been overlooked. In the present article, this issue has been studied in an analytical and comparative manner in the Iranian judicial procedure. In general, in British law, it’ s spoken about three types of damages: damages resulting from the ownership of part of the property; damages resulting from the type of work and exploitation of the project and damages resulting from the deprivation (disturbance) of right. Determining the compensation in the first case is done on the base of three rules of Concurrent value or value reduction and the rule of before and after, and in the second case is based on the method of payment of damages in the scope of civil liability and in the third case, is based on the evaluation of relocation costs or completion of business activities. Iranian law and judicial precedent have no corresponding rules regarding the damages of the first and second types, and the judicial procedure does not provide a clear criterion for damages of the third type. In some cases, determining the compensation is subject to the agreement of the parties or to the extent of definite damages. However, it seems that in Iranian law, based on accepted rules and principles, it’ s possible to provide acceptable justification for the application of rules in British law.

One who undertakes is obligated to discharging his commitment and must discharge his debt with regard to obligee.We certainly can say that nowadays, compensation is the most common reason for lack of commitment. For this reason, various religious and civil schools have studied it, besides fulfillment of one's promises, sacrifice and succession commitment.This category, furthermore, put under comparative survey sense of adjustment and various kinds of it.It intends in this way to show searching jurisprudence and whatever distinguished Imamiyyah jurists have left in their written works.

A state’s civil responsibility is one of the most widespread, challenging and disputed issues in the world. Whether or not states are responsible for recompensing citizen damages in natural disasters requires a legal and jurisprudential basis in the Iranian legal system. If such a basis does not exist then according to the "principle of non-responsibility", the state cannot be held responsible for compensating citizens.By employing a descriptive, analytical and library method, this paper has separated the different causes of flood damage from each other and has analyzed the basis and scope of the government's responsibility in compensating for damages caused by each factor separately. To achieve this goal, the flood which took place in March of 2019 in Aqqala is a suitable and comprehensive case in which to study the factors and basis of compensation for natural disasters.The main aim of this research is to understand how the government's responsibility to compensate for damages caused by different sources of damage in natural disasters can be established.According to the findings of this study, the state's responsibility to compensate for flood damages in the northern area of the city of Aqqala city can be proven as its responsibility can be analyzed based on the fault theory of responsibility, thus the government is obliged to compensate for the damages of each citizen in its entirety. Furthermore, for the flood caused in the central area of the city, the state has no legal responsibility to compensate for the damages caused by the flood to those residing next to or around the river. A moral and social responsibility does of course exist but the state has limited legal responsibility for damages to inhabitants of the areas near the river. In addition, according to traditional theories of civil responsibility, the state has no legal responsibility towards the damages caused by the flood in the southern area of Aqqala as no fault or error can be attributed to the state. However newer theories and social, economic and ethical considerations, suggest that the state compensate for these damages.

According to the Commercial Code, a bankrupt merchant is exempt from paying late payment compensation after stopping. Disagreement over whether the guarantor of the bankrupt merchant follows the merchant regarding the compensation for late payment compensation has caused the General Assembly of the Supreme Court to issue a unanimous decision No. 788 dated 2020/06/16in which, in authors opinion, Civil opinion overcomes the issue of dispute and the special conditions of the Commercial Code and the comprehensive provisions that apply to bankruptcy are abandoned and regardless of the circumstances of bankruptcy according to the rule of guarantor liability compliance with the main debt in civil law, The guarantor is also exempt from paying the compensation for the delay. The question that comes to mind is whether in all cases the amount of liability of the guarantor is a function of the amount of liability of the subject and follows it? In this article, through descriptive-analytical research method, the commercial law and the different view governing trade relations in different fields were considered and led us to believe that, basically, except in special cases, purely civil views and provisions of the civil law should not be used in interpreting commercial regulations and the theory of commercial regulation independence should have been protected to meet the commercial needs of society. This independence has been violated in the unanimous vote of the mentioned procedure and has caused confusion of the provisions of commercial law and civil law. Inevitably, like the vote of unity of procedure 811, which was held to explicit the vote 733; By issuing a new unification procedure, or explicitly amending articles such as Article 405 or Article 421 of the Commercial code, the guarantor shall retain responsible for paying the late payment compensation despite the bankruptcy and exemption of the trader.