https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/ Jurisprudence en daily 1 Tue, 23 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0330 Tue, 23 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0330 https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_732313.html Article 697 of the Islamic Penal Code (Tazirat), as the most important provision governing the crime of defamation, has always faced diverse and sometimes contradictory interpretations in judicial practice. Defamation, as one of the crimes against the dignity of individuals, is in direct interaction with freedom of expression and the right to sue. This article examines the various dimensions of this crime using a descriptive-analytical method and relying on the analysis of judicial practice, the advisory opinions of the General Legal Department of the Judiciary, and the opinions of the Unity of Procedure. In this regard, the material and moral pillars, the condition of "clarity in attribution", the possibility of defamation against legal entities, the limits of the relationship between defamation and insult, and the role of knowledge and malice are examined. Also, through a comparative analysis of the views and ambiguities in the interpretation of the phrase "inability to prove the authenticity of documents", the limitations of dealing with defamation in the courts have also been examined. The research findings show that the lack of a clear and consistent interpretation of Article 697 has led to conflicting decisions by judges and uncertainty in criminal protection of the right to reputation. Finally, the need to amend some key concepts and clarify the elements of defamation in law and practice has been emphasized. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_729875.html One of the important issues in Iranian judicial practice is the filing of a “concurrent” complaint during the course of a previously filed complaint under investigation, which results in the realization of parallel proceedings. This issue is important in terms of hearing or not hearing a “concurrent” criminal lawsuit. The basic question of the present research is as follows: in the case where a complaint bearing the aforementioned characteristics is discovered by a judicial authority either when an objection is raised by the accused, what judicial decision should be rendered by the court to which the case has been subsequently referred, or by the branch where the later-filed claim is being adjudicated? The legislator has raised and determined the issue of objection of antecedent in legal matters in the “second paragraph” of Article 84 and Articles 89 and 103 of the Civil Procedure Code approved in 1379, but such clarity is not observed in the Criminal Procedure Code. Therefore, there is a divergence of opinion in judicial practice regarding matters previously subject to criminal proceedings. It appears that, in order to uphold justice, and to prevent parallel proceedings and issuance of conflicting judgments, concurrent criminal actions are absolutely inadmissible and shall not be heard or prosecuted, and The most appropriate decision is for the competent judicial authority to issue an order to discontinue or prosecution. "The authors examine the subject through a descriptive-analytical approach. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_733926.html One of the issues that has attracted significant cases in legal practice is the possibility or impossibility of the buyer's special representative to claim damages to the sold item during the seller's ownership. Our legal literature is silent on this issue, and there are differences of opinion among lawyers on this issue. This research, which was conducted by referring to library sources and reviewing previous research and using a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to examine the possibility of transferring the right to claim compensation to the buyer, or his special representative, by examining a judicial case. Based on the results of the research, a distinction should be made between complete loss of the sold item and its partial loss. In complete loss, a representative does not occur; because the sale is not valid for the lost property; In partial loss, due to the nature of the right to claim damages, which is a right based on a person and not a right based on property, as well as the provisions of the rule of action, if the buyer is aware that the sold item has been damaged, he has acted to his own detriment, so there will be no basis for claiming damages on his part. Also, considering the principles governing civil liability, the buyer's representative will not arise; therefore, the buyer will not have the right to claim damages from the agent who caused the damage to the property. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_729876.html The limitation of action is the period of time after which the case is not heard in the courts on the condition that the respondent objects. The limitation of action can be considered generally in commercial law, because it has been predicted in most commercial lawsuits and issues. There is no serious doubt about the existence of commercial limitation of action and its reliance, unlike civil limitation of action; most jurists emphasize the existence and reliance on commercial limitation of action. According to Article 314 of the Commercial Law of 1932, the issuance of a Check is not considered a commercial act in any case, but the limitation of action for commercial lawsuits according to Article 318 of the same law, also includes a Check. However, the scope of the passage of time mentioned in the case of a Check and the ability to rely on it is one of the challenging issues in the judicial procedure. This research examines the foundations of commercial limitation of action and examines the reliance of the limitation of action in the case of a Check claim in the judicial procedure and is based on the assumption that the limitation of action of commercial claims is valid and can be relied upon, and in the case of a Check, it has been accepted in the judicial procedure with some restrictions and conditions. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_729873.html Despite the recognition of the principle of separating criminal proceedings from civil proceedings in the Iranian legal system, the legislature has granted criminal courts the authority, under certain specific and exceptional circumstances, to adjudicate the private aspect of crimes without the submission of a civil petition or adherence to the formalities of civil procedure. While examining the public claim arising from a crime, the criminal court may, in such cases, also resolve related private claims. The prevailing doctrine and jurisprudence hold that this competence is primarily recognized in crimes such as fraud, embezzlement, theft, and unlawful possession, since in the pertinent statutory provisions, the court is explicitly required to determine the private consequences. Through a descriptive-analytical method, this article examines the relevant provisions within current Iranian legislation and finds that the legislator employs diverse expressions for referring to the private claims associated with a crime, both in terms of the manner in which the court should proceed and the substantive content of its ruling. Where legal doctrine overlooks such distinctions, it cannot be considered an accurate reflection of legislative intent. The correct interpretation is that a criminal court is permitted and obliged to adjudicate the private aspect of a crime without filing a petition only when, according to the statutory provision: (1) the expression relating to the manner of the court’s performance is framed as a mandatory duty, and (2) the expression concerning the subject matter of adjudication pertains to the restitution of specific property, restoration of the prior situation, or the awarding of clearly ascertainable damages. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_732655.html The presence of judicial authorities equipped with sufficient power and authority to effectively confront crimes and their perpetrators is a prerequisite for realizing the triad of order, security, and justice in society. Maintaining this strength and authority is a fundamental requirement of any society, as it makes realizing justice more feasible and prevents a decline in public trust in the fundamental power governing society. The evolution of judicial authority clearly demonstrates that with increasing distance from the early years of the Islamic Revolution, societal culture and consequently criminal laws in dealing with offenders and their punishments have gradually shifted in approach from punitiveness and harsh confrontation with crimes toward offender rehabilitation and assistance, a trend that continues to accelerate. This shift in approach has significantly reduced the authority of judicial officials in the face of the ever-increasing wave of crimes and offenders, introducing them to a vicious cycle known as “statisticalism,” from which they have yet to escape. This descriptive-analytical study examines the conditions in Iranian society following the Islamic Revolution and demonstrates that the decline of judicial authority cannot be attributed to a single factor; rather, the combination of three factors—the expansion of bureaucracy, the inclination of post-revolutionary governments toward freedom-oriented discourse, and changes in the perspectives of judicial leadership—are among the most important reasons that have played a fundamental role in weakening this authority. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_729874.html The Administrative Court of Justice, as the creator of the administrative judicial order in the Islamic Republic of Iran, plays an unparalleled role in developing the principles of administrative law and respecting human and citizen rights in administrative procedures. Among the jurisdictions of the Administrative Court of Justice is the examination of final decisions issued by specialized administrative authorities, which also includes the decisions of the Commission of Article 100 of the Municipalities Law. Also, according to legal stipulation, one of the requirements for filing a complaint and protest in the Administrative Court is the concept of the plaintiff being a "beneficiary". Since examining existing judicial practice can help to better understand the subject and its conceptual developments in the legal system, in this study, using a descriptive-analytical and library method, we seek to answer the question: What was the practice of the General Board of the Court of Administrative Justice regarding the concept of the plaintiff being intersted in protesting the decisions of the Commission of Article 100 of the Municipalities Law? The research findings indicate that the uniform judicial precedents of the General Assembly generally confirm the relatively narrow practice of the concept of interested party in the Court's branches, but some opinions, including uniform judicial precedent No. 115 dated 2013,05,13 can be considered as a basis for a revolution in the concept of interested party in protest against the opinions of the Article 100 Commission. This is possible if we move towards accepting the general concept of the "intersted" in administrative lawsuits by accepting "public interest claims" in the jurisprudence of the Administrative Court of Justice or in law reforms. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_733925.html Modern criminal policy in Iran, in light of the Islamic Penal Code of 2013, has prioritized the transition from incarceration to alternatives to imprisonment, with the aim of offender rehabilitation and combating penal population inflation. However, the application and execution of mandatory alternatives face interpretative challenges, implementation ambiguities, and conflicts with other statutes. These instances include: the independent versus lenient nature of prison alternatives, ambiguity in the concept of "short-term imprisonment," the scope of Article 69 of the Islamic Penal Code (IPC), the interpretation of Unification Judgment No. 746 of the General Board of the Supreme Court, the interaction of mandatory alternatives with special laws (such as the Law on the Collection of Certain Government Revenues), the limited scope of mandatory alternatives, and other issues discussed in detail in this article.Using a descriptive-analytical method with a novel applied approach, the current research examines the legal foundations and judicial precedent (including advisory opinions, judicial meetings, and judgments) regarding Articles 65 to 69 of the IPC. Research findings indicate that mandatory alternatives to imprisonment possess the nature of a principal and independent punishment; their application is a mandatory duty for the judicial authority and is not contingent upon the complainant's waiver or the existence of mitigating circumstances.Furthermore, the analysis of criminal offenses reveals that the scope of Article 65 of the IPC has been limited due to various reasons. Additionally, regarding the challenges of Article 69 and the prohibitions of Article 71 of the IPC, the prevailing judicial practice tends to exclude crimes from the realm of alternative punishments. Finally, to optimize this institution—in addition to the need for a change in the legislator's approach to expanding alternatives—judges can realize the legal mandate of decarceration in short-term imprisonments by utilizing capacities such as the https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_732387.html According to the provisions of Article 21 of the Criminal Procedure Law, whenever the prosecution of a public lawsuit or the proceeding of a criminal court is assigned to resolve issues that are beyond the jurisdiction of the prosecuting authority or the criminal court, the latter authorities are "obliged" to conduct the proceedings By issuing the order, stop the investigation and leave its continuation to the definitive opinion of the competent authority. In cases where, even though there are cases related to the subject under consideration in the legal authorities, but the process of consideration and decision-making in them is not effective in the consideration and judgment of the criminal court, the issuance of the order of remand has no basis. Issuing Anatah orders in cases other than those recognized by the legislator and stated in Article 21, in addition to delaying the proceedings of the case a lot and delaying the decision regarding the case in an unjustified and inexcusable way, it can recognize and make it difficult for the criminal court to ascertain the truth. In this regard, with the descriptive and analytical method and with the aim of identifying some problems and challenges that exist in the judicial procedure surrounding the use of Anatah decree, to review and criticize (form and content) the document issued by the 10th branch of the Court of Appeal of Kermanshah province with the issue of issuing a decree Anata is paid. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_732314.html The Islamic Penal Code enacted in 2013, on the basis of depenalization approach created new legal institutions or sometimes expanded the previous institutions into a general legal institution, among which we can refer to the "Repentance Institution". After more than a decade of the application of repentance as a depenalization institution, now it is possible to examine the extent of its acceptance and application in precedent. For this purpose, the present research has evaluated and analyzed 610 criminal verdicts containing repentance as a sample of research. Quantitative findings indicate that the criminal titles of "Alcohol consumption" and "Drug-related crimes" account for a total of 75% (62% and 13%, respectively) of all cases of repentance. All other criminal titles form only 25% of cases involving repentance. Qualitative findings have also shown that judges do not prescribe rules for deciding on repentance in most cases. Also, the results confirm that the jurisprudence has a lenient approach in dealing with the criminal title of "Alcohol consumption", in such a way that 86% of cases have resulted in suspension of prosecution, repentance has worked as a mitigating tool in drug-related crimes, and a stricter approach has prevailed in other titles. In general, it is considered that the "Repentance Institution" has been accepted in a very limited way despite its wide legal domain, and the legal capacities of it have not been used. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_729877.html Abstract:This article reconsiders the role of judicial precedent in Romano-Germanic legal systems with special emphasis on Iran. The central problem is how judges in codified systems evolve from being “mouthpieces of the law” to active interpreters and co-constructors of legal meaning, and what implications this transformation has for legitimacy, rationality, and the identity of law. The study employs a philosophical–analytical and comparative methodology. It first examines theoretical literature in the philosophy of law and doctrinal analysis of landmark judgments in France, Germany, and Italy to trace the historical and institutional development of judicial precedent. It then applies a comparative lens to assess the Iranian legal system, which combines Islamic jurisprudential heritage with modern statutory law. The findings reveal that in Romano-Germanic jurisdictions, despite the primacy of codification, judicial precedent has gradually emerged as an influential source of interpretation and norm-generation, drawing legitimacy from institutionalized reasoning and collective judicial memory. In Iran, by contrast, the coexistence of ijtihād and codified statutes has placed precedent in a state of conceptual suspension, yet recent practices such as unifying decisions of the Supreme Court and advisory opinions of the Judiciary’s Legal Department indicate the gradual formation of a precedential rationality. The article concludes that consolidating judicial precedent in Iran requires strengthening legal databases and transparency, fostering cooperation between academia and the judiciary, and philosophically rethinking the balance between individual reasoning and collective rationality. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_729878.html The purchase of company shares by the same joint-stock company is prohibited in general according to Article 198 of the amendment bill of a part of the Trade Law approved in 2002 set aside restrictions in public companies and considered it correct to buy a part of the shares offered by the company admitted to the stock exchange or over-the-counter markets, but denied the right to vote in the assemblies from these shares, this restriction caused some companies to fall into the trap and buy their shares by subsidiaries or affiliated companies in order to have the right to vote in the assemblies.This research aims to investigate the procedure of the courts in dealing with voting rights, the shares purchased by the parent company by the subsidiary company, and studying the possibility of denying the repurchased shares in the assemblies. With the reviewed documents, the conclusion was reached that the courts, in the silence of the law, prevent the voting of the aforementioned shares in general meetings, whether ordinary or extraordinary. https://jurisprudence.ujsas.ac.ir/article_733924.html This research examines the effect of ignorance of the law on non-criminal rulings, since the subject of criminal rulings has already been addressed. The main question of this study is how ignorance of the law affects non-criminal rulings. The hypothesis is that ignorance related to a non-criminal ruling concerns ignorance of the subject matter rather than ignorance of the law. The objective is to demonstrate, by relying on the Islamic Penal Code of 2013, that although ignorance of the law may, in some cases, affect criminal rulings, it is in principle not a cause for the removal of criminal responsibility. Rather, ignorance of non-criminal rulings is discussed within the framework of the elements and conditions of criminal responsibility, and in some instances, as part of the mental element of the crime, it may prevent the realization of criminal responsibility. By examining Article 155 of the Islamic Penal Code of 2013, the legislator has attempted to establish a general rule regarding the impact of ignorance on criminal responsibility, while Article 144 of the same law explicitly addresses ignorance of the subject matter of criminal rulings and recognizes it as a barrier to criminal responsibility. According to the prevailing opinion, in cases such as ignorance of Article 2 of the Civil Code, the legislator has not made a distinction between ignorance of criminal law and ignorance of other laws whose enforcement affects criminal rulings. These views emphasize that absolute ignorance of the law does not affect criminal responsibility, whereas ignorance related to non-criminal rulings, by nature, falls under ignorance of the subject matter of criminal rulings. Conversely, ignorance of criminal rulings does not fall under the category of ignorance of the subject matter.