In Iranian law, administrative Proceedings are not very well known among the types of Proceedings, which is why it is important to produce literature in this regard. The first thing about administrative Proceedings is to explain the meaning of it. In the existing literature, some have defined it as a well-known and precise concept without definition, and some authors have defined it as well. Has reviewed and critiqued its definitions It has also provided ten definitions and concepts, and it is believed that the administrative Proceedings are essentially Darcy’ s administration and are subject to review by quasi-judicial authorities and the Court of Administrative Justice.

According to the law of criminal procedure, judicial authorities should deal with the matter as soon as possible and avoid any action that prolongs the Proceedings. Today, there is a general rule and principle in Proceedings and it is said that it is accepted by international documents and it is conventional and reasonable, and this rule and principle is that the process of Proceedings should be carried out in a reasonable and conventional period of time, which has a favorable effect. and guarantee the rights of each party. It is also believed that the delay in the implementation of justice is considered a form of injustice. On the other hand, today we are talking about economic Proceedings, and in this type of Proceedings, it is desired to have the lowest cost. One of the significant costs in the Proceedings is the cost and financial burden of the Proceedings, and the other is the cost of the Proceedings. In many cases, time is considered as the most important and fundamental issue and factor and can be evaluated. In other words, the benefit of the Proceedings and its effectiveness and efficiency is in the speed of the Proceedings. One of the issues that is effective and significant in prolonging the criminal Proceedings is the issue of absentee Proceedings. In this article, the existing laws in this field and the effective factors in the prolongation of the judicial process regarding absentee Proceedings are examined and this issue is examined. An important issue that is considered and investigated in this research is that by examining the issue in jurisprudence and the existing laws and the previous laws and comparing them, are the existing laws in the current situation regarding absentee Proceedings in criminal matters effective in prolonging the judicial process and the role of They have and cause the time of criminal Proceedings to be extended and prolonged, which is one of the reasons for the delay of the Proceedings, and as a result, it causes a delay in the execution of justice and each of the parties attaining their legal rights.

In French law, there arise controversies about legal notion of Proceedings’ relationship (lien d’instance). Some authors addressing on Proceedings’ connection as real riddle. Some other qualified this relationship as contractual or quasi-contractual and refer to it as judicial contract- as formerly described in reference to, especially during the classical period in Rome. Some authors believe that best leave the contractual qualification of the Proceedings’ relationship unto Roman Law, because the litigants’ obligations have only the legal origin. Despite the aforementioned criticisms, very principles of civil procedure law may authorize qualifying as contractual, the concept of civil Proceedings.

Urgent Proceedings refer to a kind of judicial Proceedings. The speed of Proceedings, the fact that the merits of the case are not dealt with, and the elimination of procedure are special features of these Proceedings. The result of this type of Proceedings, manifested in the form of a preliminary injunction, is actually a type of precautionary measure to protect the rights of the plaintiff. Preliminary injunction in family claims is not fundamentally different from the one enshrined in the Civil Procedure Code and basically follows the same conditions. However, the existence of certain realities that require dealing with important and sensitive family issues has given a new feature to the institution of preliminary injunction in family claims. The lack of requirement to post bail or obtain the approval of the head of the judicial district, having a deadline and the possibility that the subject matter of the original lawsuit and the preliminary injunction be the same, are the special features of the institution of preliminary injunction in family cases. Article 7 of the Family Protection Code (2013) deals with preliminary injunction in the family court and contains noticeable changes compared to the previous regulations. Relying on a descriptive-analytical approach and a library method, the present article has examined the institution of urgent Proceedings in family cases in the light of the changes made in the Family Protection Code ratified in 2013, and after delineating the historical background of the above institution in the family court, its special features and instances in family cases have been analyzed.

In an international connection which different factors of legal relation were spread in different countries, bringing of several actions with the same object in different countries court was completely probable. Each party with various reasons seeks litigation in a court providing their interest in better way. However, parallel litigation in it, the same object impose burdensome charges on litigant’s parties and judiciary systems and will cause an impediment for recognition of foreign judgments. Profound difference legal systems and direct relation of jurisdiction issue with sovereignty rights of states is an impediment for existence of uniform and worldwide resolution for settlement of parallel litigation problem. In some way, many of treaties and model laws merely have been satisfied with defective integration and cause akind of mediation between rules of major legal systems.  

Considering the ambiguities in the provisions of Articles 63 and 64 of the Administrative Justice Court Act, it is of particular importance to examine the limits of the jurisdiction of the Court's branches in dealing with the opinions of special administrative authorities. These ambiguities include the concept of "the presence of formal or substantive objections", "examination and adaptation of the issue in order to comply with the legal regulations" and "examination in terms of identifying the issue" in Articles 63 and 64, the lack of separation of the subject authorities in Articles 63 and 64, lack of attention to the multiple functions of some authorities, The lack of the task of the branches dealing with the decisions of the authorities is the subject of Article 64 in case of formal and procedural objections, Conducting legal Proceedings instead of thematic Proceedings or vice versa. A detailed examination and response to these uncertainties can help to improve the quality of Proceedings and the justice in the Administrative Justice Court and improve the supervisory capacity of this institution to judicially control the decisions of the authority’s subject to Article 10 Clause 2 of the Administrative Justice Court act. The findings of this research, which was carried out with a descriptive-analytical method indicate that the recognition of dedicated administrative organization in terms of their competence and function and the separation of "administrative courts" from "diagnostic administrative organizations" on the one hand, and "legal" or "thematic" Proceedings on the other hand, based on the type of authority and how to file a complaint The plaintiff can reduce ambiguities and improve the quality indicators of Proceedings in this field.

Constitutionalisation means entering the legal rule into a group of fundamental rules that the government is obliged to support and implement. In fact, Constitutionalisation is a process of change and transformation that occurs due to the influence of basic norms in different trends of law and it may be as a result of imbuing the set of legal order with these norms.  In Iran, some articles of the Criminal Procedure Law approved in 2013 are in conflict with some of the principles of Constitutional law that are related to the Procedure. Based on this, it seems necessary to analyze the existing conflicts and examine the possibility of the criminal judge for referring to the constitutional law and not implementing the legal articles that are in conflict with the constitutional principles. The Constitutionalisation of criminal Procedure gives judges the possibility to refer to the constitutional law in the face of conflicting laws. In addition, it will be possible to invalidate the Proceedings and decisions by the higher judicial authorities based on the contradiction of the ordinary law with the constitutional law. One of the tools to achieve this goal is redefining the principles related to criminal Procedure. Redefinition with using Constitutionalisation tool  give the possibility to the criminal judges to reach the mentioned results after knowing those principles that govern the criminal Procedure.

Observing a reasonable deadline throughout the criminal investigation process, as one of the most fundamental defensive rights of the accused, emphasizes the importance of reasonable expediting in the process of Proceedings in a high degree of accuracy, which considers necessary for the fair trial and the desired outcome of criminal Proceedings. Delivering justice within a reasonable time is one of the basic principles of criminal procedure. The concept of a reasonable period of due process is that through a reasonable period, it is possible to deal with the case and establish justice in this way; but it is not easy to determine howdeadline is normal and reasonable. In the present article, three criteria are analyzed as criteria for determining the reasonableness of the trial period: typical (objective), subjective (personal) and mixed (intermediate). The objective criterion emphasizes the determination of the deadline for prosecution by the legislature. The subjective criterion is the circumstances of each case, which determines a reasonable period appropriate to that case, and can vary from case to case. Finally, the mixed criterion utilizes both of the above factors. Eventually introducing violations of reasonable time, the guarantee of non-compliance within a reasonable time is reviewed.

Tari lawsuit is one of the long lines of the nature of the lawsuit and consists of four types of lawsuits. The legislator has filed these claims under titles: counter-claim, third-party litigation, third-party litigation, and extra litigation in the Code of Civil Procedure law irregularly. With the explanation that the extra litigation is out of order and in Article 98 and in chapter 4, under the title of the hearing, has been named without title; while other claims are referred to in the first chapter of chapter 6 as "accidental cases" Is. Allegations of forgery may be filed subjugate or forged, and counterfeiting may also be filed in the form of a dispute or third-party filing or third-party filing or extra litigation. Forgery lawsuits are examined in different ways from different angles to determine the place of forgery in the civil justice system.