In general, the liability of carriers towards the cargo owner arises out of an undue carriage of goods. Nevertheless, the carrier might be obliged to perform the customs formalities of the cargo and the liability arising out of that. This has been hardly considered by the authors in the field of transportation regulations. This article tries to answer the question that whether the carrier has any obligation for performance of customs formalities in case of no specification in the contract; if the answer is true, what are the conditions for this kind of carrier liability, so that whether it is covered by the international carriage conventions or it is subject to particular regulations out of the conventions. Finally, this aspect of carrier’ s liability has been analyzed in the international conventions for carriage of goods and the Iranian Customs Act as well.

Laws of procedure are full of templates and forms through which the will necessarily emerges. "Formalities" are considered as one of the most important forms. Sometimes, the proceedings must be carried out with special arrangements and rituals that the legislator has determined, and these special arrangements have turned "formalities" into one of the important principles and characteristics of proceedings. The stubbornness of the ritual rules and their subjectivity have made it difficult to understand the nature of the formalities. With such a bad reputation, these formalities lose their attraction to be used and studied. For this reason nowadays, judicial systems tend to reduce formalities and specify a minimum of them for proceedings. However, the present article tries to examine the formalities and understand their meaning through functional analysis. The most prominent and important theory in contemporary sociology is "functionalism" or the attitude of authenticity of function. This analysis focuses on efficiency and function. One of the important principles raised in the interpretation of formal rules is the interpretation of these rules based on efficiency as well as goal-oriented interpretation. Paying attention to function and purpose has been accepted as a basis in the legislation and implementation of formal rules. At least in the civil code, there are cases where the legislator specified the function and purpose of the regulations. Article 155 of the Civil Code for example, has mentioned the function and purpose of providing evidence as follows: "Providing evidence is to preserve it. . . ". The functions and purposes of other judicial institutions are not authorized and should be analyzed with inferential tools. In ascertaining and inferring the functions and goals, it should be noted that a rule may have several functions and goals. Although the function of communication is to inform the audience, some contents in the judicial document have a separate goal, which cannot be achieved by simply informing the audience. For this reason, by achieving a function of a rule, the work cannot be considered finished, and perhaps this is why a group believes that the search for the function and purpose of the rules should be done individually in each case and situation. what is the function of formalities? What purpose and function the legislator expect from this institution by determining them? The study hypothesizes that formalities cannot affect the main functions of an institution. A rule, the absence of which disrupts or makes incomplete the function of the relevant institution, is not a formality.

According to the provisions of Civil Proceedings Code, courts procedural principles and formalities are not required to be respected in arbitration. Such provisions are differently interpreted by lawyers. Some lawyers believe that since arbitration is a kind of personal judgment, it should not be subject to the civil procedure and therefore arbitrators directly or with the request of the parties may refrain from applying the courts procedural principles and formalities in conducting arbitration. In contrast, some other lawyers argue that since such principles and formalities are compulsory, permanent and general, therefore it is binding for both court judges and private arbitrators. In this paper, this issue will be considered and discussed.

Gnosisis the salient quality of humanity spirit. The exalted Islamic and Iranian gnosis is including the ceremonies and customs, and "Sama" is the one of them, that has a special place. This article is the brief narration of the "Sama"s" ceremonies and customs in the Islamic and Iranian gnosis.

This paper examines the social morals and customs of Lootian in the Qajar period.Lootian was part of a chain that began with Fotowat and continued through market guild and Ayyari. Although it was transformed in some course, but in the decline, it changed into Lootian and in the present century was changed to Lumpen (in the Marxist theories). There are some different and sometimes conflicting meanings of Lootian, from barefooted and poor, to Pederast.Also Loot in its own language means Satiety. In this article, we explain Lootian’s morals and their difference with Panties and explain attitudes toward Lootian. And specifically, we explain Lootian’s cover and their clothing components, their habitude, Lootian’s languages and dialects, their funs and games, and their names and titles. Finally, rituals of Lootian are discussed and their competitions and fights in Muharram Ceremonies were explained.

according to Notice of article 455 of the Iranian criminal procedure code 2013 failure to comply with the procedural formalities does not invalidate the judgement, unless such formalities are of such significance as to invalidate the judgement. Similar to the provisions of this rule was in articles 359, 426 and item 2 of article 430 of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1912, as well as paragraph 2 of article 257 and paragraph 2 of article 265 of the criminal Procedure code for the General and Revolutionary Courts of 1997. The legislator has not defined the formalities, and the difference of them. The present article examines the formalities and their effects at different stages of criminal proceedings from the beginning to the end by using an analytical method.

The laws of Iran, in many cases, including the family courts, the dispute resolution council and forcible entry’s quarrel, with unclearly pointing to the non-observance litigation formalities without defining the scopes of their non-observance, have brought about the disparity of judicial proceedings. In this regard, lawyers definition of the "litigation formalities" is also almost and there is considerable controversy in explaining its implications. Discrepancies in cases, such as petition, communication, court costs and due dates were so high, that Some of which have been considered as a principles of the proceedings and some others place it as part of litigation formalities. So in distinguishing between the litigation formalities it must be properly segmented; the first is the "formal ceremony", which consists of two parts; But in separating the formalities of the judiciary, it must be properly segmented; the first is "fundamental formalities" which consist of two parts; The first part, including the communication and the hearing session, is "the formalities of the introduction of the implementation of the principles", which can not be dismissed even with the stipulation of the legislator. The other part, including petitions and court costs, has been "Basic formalities of litigation", which can be leaved out by the legislator's case in certain proceedings. The second type is formalization with a weaker degree of "simple formalities", which includes many examples, including how it is communicated, the time of the hearing, the due dates and the respites.