The purpose of the proceeding and the issuance of JUDGMENT is the determination of the legal solution and it's performance between the parties. However sometimes for various reasons, there is no way to perform the JUDGMENT. This means that the enforcement of the JUDGMENT may be in conflict with the rights of third parties or its subject may be changed or administrative obstacles cause to cease the execution of it. In some cases, the enforcement of JUDGMENT also needs to preconditions that it can't be established and implemented without the independent proceeding and with respect to the right of defense. In fact, the principles of due process for example the hearing parties statement, giving the opportunity to defense and the complaint against the court decision must be followed also in the enforcement stage and Hence, sometimes it must be stopped the enforcement of JUDGMENT. These cases have not a certain criteria in jurisprudence. One of the its reasons is the lack of supervision of excellent authorities over the executive orders because most decisions in the implementation stage are through administrative orders and the beneficiary can't complain about them. Due to defect in the legal literature (doctrine) and fitful jurisprudence, the effects of unenforceability of JUDGMENT exactly are not clear. In fact, the main question is, can it be possible to enforce a definitive JUDGMENT? And if the answer is positive, what is the criterion of it? It seems there are exceptions in judicial review to failure for implementing of definitive JUDGMENTs and seems the most important criterion can be seen in practical problems and changing the subject of JUDGMENT. Hence in the present article, these issues will be considered.

This paper aims to investigate the impact of working memory capacity and excessive cognitive load on people's confidence after solving the Tower of Hanoi puzzle. For this purpose, two groups with different levels of cognitive load were formed for the study, and Iranian students in the age range of 20 to 40 years from universities in Tehran province were included in this study. After assessing working memory capacity, subjects in both groups solved the computerized version of the Tower of Hanoi problem. At the end, through a questionnaire that was designed and made for this study, they evaluated their confidence in their performance. This study started in 2019 and ended after one and a half years. However, the study did not find any relationship between the capacity of their visual-spatial working memory and their self-confidence, either alone or in interaction with the cognitive load, but there is a two-way relationship between bearing additional cognitive load and increasing FINAL confidence. Therefore, people who bear more cognitive load are more confident about their cognitive performance at the end of the Tower of Hanoi problem-solving process.

The retrial is one of the extraordinary methods to complain against decisions whereby the plaintiff demands the issuing court to reverse the FINAL JUDGMENT which has been pronounced by the court. If the court accepts the request, the action is reviewed again. Article 426 of Iran’ s Act of Civil Procedure counted seven causes for rehearing. Critical analyses of these causes show us the drawn foundation for retrial, and it is required first, 1-3 sub-sections of the aforementioned section would be removed, and second two other causes would be added. The first case happens when it is proved that the JUDGMENT has been pronounced based on false testimony or witness statement or oath, and second case happens if it is demonstrated before the court that the issuing judge has gone wrong that is effective in being the JUDGMENT unjust.

To Aristotle and Paul, the subject of ethics deals with the answer to the question as to how one should be, not what one should do. In the eyes of each of them, ethics is concerned with virtues, not with actions. Consequently, both of them consider the idea that ethics is a set of standards of behavior that has been replaced by expounding the idea of one’s self. However, the difference between Paul’s principles and Aristotle's principles lessens the possibility of identifying the ideas of of these two thinkers and producing one ethical theory. First, Paul’s ethical theory is based on three principles: faith, hope and love. Aristotle stresses on four virtues: justice, wisdom, courage and moral purity, each of which has several epistemological outcomes in the field of ethics. Second, the emphasis of Paul’s ethics on the role of grace in man’s happiness on one hand, and the different definition of virtue and the emphasis of Aristotle’s ethics on the epistemological role of practical philosophy, on the other hand, highlight the mentioned difference. Despite the fact that Greek culture has exerted influence on Paul’s theology, prescription of his ethical standards is by no means dependent on Aristotelian virtues. The discussion in the present paper is centered on such subjects like Aristotle’s definition of virtues, investigating the general coordinates of Paul's ethics, reviewing the three mentioned principles in his epistles and underlying its difference with Aristotle' s ethics.

According to the common view, as we know, knowledge, in the entire history of western epistemology, was defined as the justified true belief that the JUDGMENT is one of its constituents. In this essay, however, considering some philosophical writings of Descartes and John Lock, we will show that this is not a correct view. Then, we will illustrate that it was only after Emanuel Kant that the connection between knowledge and JUDGMENT has been occurred. We also emphasize that in spite of the fact that in many cases, especially in the sciences realm, propositional knowledge is the only type of knowledge that can be accepted, there are many cases that propositional knowledge is not efficacy.

JUDGMENT of bankruptcy leads to bankruptcy of merchant. Therefore, merchant will be incapable and cannot possess in his asset. Various provisions can be found in commercial code, regarding contract’s of bankrupt merchant, which is inconsistent with civil code. Article 423 has stipulated that trades of merchant after bankruptcy, in three cases will be void. This position is not consistent with civil code which implies that transactions which are against the benefit of merchant is dependent on verification of debtors are invalid ones. The last step to remove incapacity from bankrupt merchant is rehabilitation of bankruptcy. However rehabilitation of bankruptcy of corporate is doubtful. Because of survival of juristic personality until at end of liquidation of a company and general interpretation of “any bankrupt merchant”, rehabilitation of juristic personality is acceptable.

Based on Holy Quran and Ahl al-Bayt’ s guidance, the prophets are innocent from committing sin. Some verses of the Holy Quran, however, seem to contradict this belief. Among these verses is verse 24 of Chapter "Saad” , which is narrating Prophet David's asking for forgiveness, regarding a speech he announced when judging a dispute between two plaintiffs. Commentators have different opinions on the cause of asking for forgiveness; but all of them are disputable. In this article, after reviewing and criticizing the existing opinions, referring to holy verses and hadiths, the reason for David’ s forgiveness has been stated as “ FINAL word” JUDGMENT. According to these evidence, using "FINAL word" JUDGMENT had created some difficulties for the Prophet in the community. In order to prevent these problems, he asked God not to use this style of JUDGMENT in future and just judge in the usual way; and God accepted his request. But in the story of JUDGMENT between two plaintiffs – that asking for forgiveness related to their arbitration is expressed in this verse– the holy prophet used the same type of JUDGMENT again due to the unusual appearance of the plaintiffs. However, after he realized that the story had been a scene for his trial, he apologized to God and God accepted his apology and commanded him to judge as usual in future JUDGMENTs. The approach to this research is Quran-based in which the definitive religious facts (the definitive JUDGMENTs of intellect, the Qur'an, tradition, experience, literature, intellectuals' way of conduct and the religious, etc. ) based on Holy Quran are the referee of religious thoughts and practices.