seyed mahdi dadmarzi; Azam Heidari
Abstract
Nature of Reward is one of the subjects on which there is disagreement in Imamiyah Jurisprudence and Law. Recognition of the legal nature of Reward is of significance in terms of the conditions of fulfillment and its consequences and rules. The purpose of this article is recognizing the nature of Reward ...
Read More
Nature of Reward is one of the subjects on which there is disagreement in Imamiyah Jurisprudence and Law. Recognition of the legal nature of Reward is of significance in terms of the conditions of fulfillment and its consequences and rules. The purpose of this article is recognizing the nature of Reward in Imamieh Jurisprudence, Iranian law and law of the west. The Jurists and lawyers have expressed different views in this regard. In the Imamiyah Jurisprudence there is no separation between offer of reward to the public and offer of reward to the certain person and jurists have stated their opinions in general terms. In the Iranian Civil Code the nature of reward is not clearly explained and the term of obligation has been employed in an absolute way for refering to its nature. According to jurisprudential and legal analyses, it seems that reward have various external examples that can be determined in each case according to its requirements in the form of contract or unilateral juridical act or common causality. In law of the west, offer of reward to a certain person is not disputed and its nature is considered to be contractual. What is controversial is the offer of reward to the public. Some legal systems have accepted the the contractual approach and others have adopted the reward as a unilateral promise in which there is no need for acceptance and knowledge of the rewarder is not required except for the case of an explicit stipulation in the contract.
Alireza Fasihizadeh; Azam Heydari
Abstract
Abstract Judicial acts and facts are the sources of legal relationships and responsibilities among human beings. An analysis of judicial nature and cause of the creation of the judicial acts and facts can prevent us from confusion in these concepts and in a similar fashion in the effects and judicial ...
Read More
Abstract Judicial acts and facts are the sources of legal relationships and responsibilities among human beings. An analysis of judicial nature and cause of the creation of the judicial acts and facts can prevent us from confusion in these concepts and in a similar fashion in the effects and judicial decisions related to them. The purpose of this article is to recognize and compare the nature and the cause of creation of judicial acts and facts in the Iranian and the French law. In a general sense, in the Iranian law, judicial acts have arbitrary characters, whereas judicial facts look real. However, in the French law, the judicial acts are subjective, whereas judicial facts are objective. In the Iranian law, the cause of judicial acts is an intention to perform an action, which is a sensual interplay, while in the French law, jurists believe that intention and consent are different entities, and that consent which is the cause of judicial acts has a sensual quality. Additionally, intention in the intentional judicial facts is a simple and material intention.