Document Type : Academicm and Research

Author

• Badie Fathi

-Assistant Professor, Department of Private and Economic Law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Allameh Tabatabai University, Iran.

Abstract

The principle of good administration of justice requires that all related lawsuits be investigated and dealt with by a single branch. so that the judge can render an appropriate judgment on all aspects of the case and also To avoid conflicting decisions.However, in the Civil procedure of Iran and France, various challenges may occur when joining related cases:If the judge does not find the connection between the lawsuits and examines each case separately and issues their decision, or if related cases are being heard in two branches of the same court and there is a dispute about the existence of a connection between the judges, does the president of the court have the right to resolve the dispute between the judges or not?What should be done if the cases are being heard in two courts with local jurisdiction and there is a dispute between the two courts regarding the existence of a connection between the cases? Or if there is a connection between the cases in absentee proceedings, is it possible to join the cases or not? What is the sanction for violating the joining of related cases? In this article, we are trying to find the challenges of joining related cases in a comparative way.

Keywords

• Civil procedure
• Procedural exceptions
• Joining the cases
• related cases
• The principle of good administration of justice

Main Subjects

• Legal (Comparative Islamic and Western Law)