Purpose: The science of INTERPRETATION, as the most important science responsible for understanding the Qur'an, needs to be methodized and updated so that the teachings of the Qur'an can be used easily for all classes of people. In the present study, the meaning of "future research in INTERPRETATION" is the ability to create desirable models for more efficient INTERPRETATION in the future, by using scientific tools, creativity and relying on the foundations and rules of INTERPRETATION and compensating the damages of INTERPRETATION in the past.Method: This research, with descriptive analytical method, answers the question, what are the fields and requirements of future research in INTERPRETATION? Findings: The results of the current research are based on the fact that special attention to the Qur'an, as the most important source of INTERPRETATION, rationality and methodical consideration in INTERPRETATION, attention to the prerequisites of INTERPRETATION, INTERPRETATION based on the requirements of the time, the need to pay attention to thematic INTERPRETATION, studying on the history of INTERPRETATION and observing the manners and conditions of INTERPRETATION are one of the most important requirements of INTERPRETATION in the future. Results: Considering the developments that will take place in the field of knowledge, methods and expectations from science in the future, the INTERPRETATION will also change. For this reason, in order not to cause various damages to the INTERPRETATION of the Qur'an, it is necessary to pay attention to the various contexts, principles and requirements of the INTERPRETATION of the Qur'anic commentators and scholars.

The INTERPRETATION of TREATIES has important, wide-spread and explicated affects in international law. The awards of Iran-US Claims Tribunal, with more than a quarter of century in operation since 1982 have profoundly affected the different fields of international law, including the INTERPRETATION of TREATIES. The present article deals with the Tribunal's practice in the subject of INTERPRETATION of TREATIES. The Tribunal's INTERPRETATION of Algerian Declarations and other international agreements, in addition to creating good and reliable precedents, have some effects on the development of international law in the subject of INTERPRETATION of TREATIES. The Tribunal always applies the 1969 Vienna Convention of the Law of TREATIES, in particular Articles 31 and 32, and has interpreted Algerian Declarations in conformity with the above provisions. One of the principles and rules invoked by the Tribunal is the principle of prevailing concept under which each word must be interpreted in its own context and with regard to the object and purpose of a treaty.

Article 31(3)(c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention stipulates that in the INTERPRETATION of a treaty, together with the context, “any relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties” shall be taken into account. Therefore, in treaty INTERPRETATION, in addition to its text and context and other elements of the general rule of INTERPRETATION set out in Article 31 of the Vienna Convention, the relevant rules of international law should also be considered. The main question this research intends to answer is: What is the position of relevant rules of international law in the INTERPRETATION of TREATIES? It appears that a treaty should be interpreted in harmony with other relevant rules of the international legal system of which it forms part. Thus, employing the relevant rules of international law in the INTERPRETATION of a treaty can guarantee the unity and systemic integration of the international legal system. This research will study the position of relevant rules of international law in the INTERPRETATION of TREATIES by analyzing international documents and jurisprudence.

According to common Articles 31 and 32 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of TREATIES and the 1986 Vienna Convention on the Law of TREATIES between States and International Organizations, subsequent practice of the parties to a treaty is an authentic element in the INTERPRETATION of that treaty,whether it is a mere interstate treaty or a constituent treaty of an international organization. Because of the growth and development in the life of an IO and originating from its subsequent practice, the constituent treaty of that organization entails a modern reading. Directing an IO in a legal and desirable way is based on Constituent treaty of that organization. To the same extent, this role can and should be expected from the organization's own subsequent practice. Legal precedent, ILC findings and legal doctrine confirm this effect. Examination the role of subsequent practice by IO's organs and practice followed by the parties of the constituent TREATIES of international organizations in the INTERPRETATION of that treaty, is this paper's purpose.

Nowadays there are many aliens’ populations living in other countries. Forced Migration and Study of Religious Sciences are two main reasons introducing Iran as a host country. This paper Intends to clarify some questions about enforcement of Iranian civil code which determines the applicable law on the personal status of foreigners. There are some disagreements about the law governing personal status and situation of foreigners and it is because of some ambiguities in the Civil Code. There are two main INTERPRETATIONs about the Civil Code: the first view claims that the law of Iran must principally apply to Personal status of foreigners unless there is a treaty between Iran and the foreigner’ s national state which resolve the problem; but the second view defends applying law of the foreigner’ s national state and believes that absence of a treaty has no effect. According to the historical events and legal facts with an analytical view, this paper proves that the second INTERPRETATION is more efficient and rational.

Providing the legal systems with stability and dynamism requires the existence of stable rules and at the same time with a necessary degree of flexibility to ensure that the legal system would be practical and effective if important and real changes occur in social situations. International judicial authorities, in the course of litigation, identify the basis and reality of the rules and legal principle through INTERPRETATION and adaptation with the subject matter of the cases, and in this way, meet the needs arising from developments in the international situation. The European Court of Human Rights, whose main function is to resolve disputes arising from the European Convention on Human Rights, in some cases, through the use of a static INTERPRETATION, against dynamic INTERPRETATIONs, has insisted on the provisions of the Convention and, in some cases, having due regard to the structure of the European community, used the evolutionary and dynamic INTERPRETATION of the provisions of the Convention. The Court, in many cases, referred to a concept called “ the European Consensus” to justify implementing the dynamic INTERPRETATION of the Convention and responded to the new situations. This approach has been faced with various agreements and disagreements. The European Court of Human Rights by applying the dynamic INTERPRETATION method takes into account the will of States as a key element in the evolution of rules and obligations in international law and at the same time has undermined the need for expressing State’ s will to accept these developments. In this way, the human rights rules and obligations enshrined in the Convention are evolving with changes in the requirements of the present time and social realities.

Considering the fact that the words in the intra-religious attitude are considered in two ways, the first is towards jurisprudential words and the second is a rational and conceptual view focusing on their meanings. we have tried to deal with one of the most important issues of intra-religious attitude with a rational approach by descriptive and analytical method, which is the category of "hermeneutic INTERPRETATION" of words, especially the most influential idea of INTERPRETATION & that is the view of the "spirit of meaning" of Ghazali. After Ghazali, Ibn Arabi used this theory of Ghazali regarding the development of meaning in creating his new idea, and by re-reading Ghazali's idea with a mystical approach, he presented his own theory regarding the expansion of meaning. While accepting the argument of the focal point of the theory of the spirit of meaning, he removes it from the exclusivity to the "linear", and for this purpose, he brought up arguments as well as the Conditions of Hermeneutic INTERPRETATION in this regard. Ibn Arabi's arguments on transversal INTERPRETATION include new formulations in the argument, which after him, this theory was favored and accepted by Mulla Sadra, and then it was accepted by his students.

In the course of international tribunals’ adjudications, one of the most important issues to deal with is to solve the problem of conflict of laws through determining the applicable law. Monism and the priority of international law over domestic law was accepted and confirmed by the majority of jurists, especially those believe in monism doctrine, from different legal systems. For the lawyers and arbitrators the INTERPRETATION of TREATIES and contracts is a vital and basic step in litigation or arbitration procedure. Toward determining of rights and duties of parties in investment law, the occurrence of conflict of laws between international law and domestic law is a usual and ordinary subject matter. Notwithstanding the indications of doctrine of priority of domestic law over international law, but the search in the TREATIES, Contracts, Doctrine and Legal precedents verify the contrary view point. Today the states liabilities in investment arbitration even with the contractual origination, changed to the states international liabilities, with presence of new provisions like as umbrella clause (As catch all provision), which reaffirm on the priority and influence of international law over domestic law. My uppermost aim in writing this article has been to study and show this evolutionary legal transformation in international investment law and to meet that end legal precedent has been examined.

A contrario reasoning has been widely used in the Permanent Court of International Justice & its successor (International Court of Justice) on various occasions. The questions ariseing are, what is the criterion for the existence and non-existence of a contrario in the statutory law and legal propositions? To what extent and how has a contrario reasoning been used in the PCIJ and ICJ jurisprudence? What is the importance of this essential argument? And finally, have they contributed to the creation of a predictable legal framework and the coherent development of international law? Analysis of the judgments and advisory opinions regarding this concept help us to understand the nature of the concept and to assess its scope in a better way. Having Followed up the judicial procedure, it is concluded that a contrario reasoning is one of the basic and flexible methods of reasoning in international law. The ICJ and its predecessor have used this form of reasoning to justify their decisions, in the process of interpreting a treaty to discover the spirit of the law, and as a supplementary means for the determination of the content of rules to be applied in certain cases. This form of legal reasoning has also been cited many times and in various contexts in all major substantive fields of international law.

Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of TREATIES, when interpreting a treaty there shall be taken into account any subsequent practice in the application of the treaty which establishes the agreement of the Parties regarding its INTERPRETATION. A large number of TREATIES have reached certain age and they need to be adapted to the current situation. One way to that end is to interpret the TREATIES by means of the subsequent practice of the parties. In recent years, International Law Commission has paid particular attention to this topic and various international tribunals have resorted to the subsequent practice in order to interpret the TREATIES. In its Judgment of 5 December of 2011 in the “Application of the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995” case, the International Court of Justice addressed the question of subsequent practice and its role in the INTERPRETATION of TREATIES. The present article examines the compatibility of the said judgment with both the 1969 Vienna Convention and the previous case-law of the Court.