List of Articles French law

• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  1 - A Comparative Study of Trickery, Examples and Ways to Deal with it in Imamiya Jurisprudence and Iranian and French Law
  Babak Mohammadi Ghahfarokhi Davoud Nasiran (corresponding author) Masud Shirani
  10.30495/jijl.2022.68738.1562
  A trick in jurisprudence means to achieve the desired religious legal and legitimate goal; whether the way to reach it is halal or the said way is religiously illegitimate. In the term of Iranian law, it means the ability to use the silence or summary of the law in orde More

  A trick in jurisprudence means to achieve the desired religious legal and legitimate goal; whether the way to reach it is halal or the said way is religiously illegitimate. In the term of Iranian law, it means the ability to use the silence or summary of the law in order to acquire rights for the unjust in ways that are against the nature of the law, and in the term of French law, it means a shrewd act in which, by using the hidden defects of the law, a person seeks to perform a seemingly legal act. These different definitions have caused differences in examples of trickery and of course the solutions to deal with it. The present study is carried out through a descriptive-analytical method and tries to answer questions such as "What is the trick, examples and solutions to deal with it in Imamiya jurisprudence, Iranian and French law?" Examples of trickery in Imamiya jurisprudence are divided into three categories: Examples of real positive and legitimate tricks; examples of real negative and reprehensible tricks; Examples of formal tricks. Examples of tricks in Iranian and French laws can be divided into two parts: examples of tricks that violate formal laws and examples of tricks that violate substantive laws. In Imamiya jurisprudence, there is no countermeasure for permissible tricks, but two solutions are proposed for haram (forbidden) tricks including the moral solution that means piety and the jurisprudential solution which means ruling on being haram (forbidden). The solutions to deal with trickery in Iranian law are the theory of motive or direction; the theory of good faith; the theory of preventing the abuse of the right; the theory of public order; the principle of compliance of the contract with the intention; the base of the arms; the principle of Sad Zaraye (avoiding doing harms), the principle of “Yu’amil al-Mukalaf bi Naqiz Maqsoudah”. Regarding the solutions to deal with trickery in French law, it is possible to refer to the strategies including implementing the laws of the European Union, establishing various institutions to fight trickery and fraud, identifying points covered by the law by digital technologies, determining case and subject laws, determining the punishment in the criminal laws. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  2 - A Comparative Study of Compulsory Insurance Law on Inflation in Islamic Jurisprudence and French Law
  Mitra Shariatzadeh Abbas ArabKhazayeli SeyyedAsgari Hosseiny Moghadam
  The aim of the present study is to compare the effect of coercion on the inflation insurance in the legal systems of Iran and France. Descriptive-analytical method was employed in the study and the results indicated that both countries, Iran and France, currently fail t More

  The aim of the present study is to compare the effect of coercion on the inflation insurance in the legal systems of Iran and France. Descriptive-analytical method was employed in the study and the results indicated that both countries, Iran and France, currently fail to have a written law on compulsory inflation insurance; however, they are authorized to approve this law. Our country has formally recognized this necessity based on legal reasoning and found it easy to legislate. On the other hand, this law can come into force in France based on its Common Law system, if necessary. The findings of the study also show that formal recognition and provision of details in Iranian legal system is better than French legal system, so that it can be added as an article either to the Civil Code or insurance law; however, it has a time-consuming procedure. On the contrary, French legal system quickly recognizes supervisory structures independent of the legislature and the judiciary, and implements such a law that could protect individuals’ properties before an economic tsunami takes place. In fact, the only difference that matters between the two legal systems is speed. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  3 - Conditions and Effects of the Ruler on Determining the Demand and its Price in Iranian and French law
  Gholamreza Rostamifar Saleh Yamrali Ali akbar Esmaieli
  The subject of the request and its determination can be studied in jurisprudential texts and the law of some countries such as Iran and France. Determining the claim and its price in legal claims is a very important issue that is also known as the main and basic element More

  The subject of the request and its determination can be studied in jurisprudential texts and the law of some countries such as Iran and France. Determining the claim and its price in legal claims is a very important issue that is also known as the main and basic element of any lawsuit. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine the conditions and effects of determining the demand in Iranian and French law which has been studied in legal dimensions. The authors have used descriptive-analytical and library collection methods. Financial or non-financial demand, the criteria for evaluating the demand price, and the rules of demand determination are very important issues that can be examined. In French law, the demand and its determination can be considered important, and this issue is mentioned in Article 1128 of the French Civil Code, and the criterion and criterion for evaluating the demand and its price is its "tradability". Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  4 - Judicial and Lawful Approach on the Status of Natural Children
  aliakbar izadifard mary mohajeri
  The natural children and the legal capacity related to them has been always a matter of controversy in many legal systems. In some legal systems such as France, homogenizing the rights of legitimate and illegitimate children is sought, while in Islamic countries, partic More

  The natural children and the legal capacity related to them has been always a matter of controversy in many legal systems. In some legal systems such as France, homogenizing the rights of legitimate and illegitimate children is sought, while in Islamic countries, particularly in Iran, the purity of parentage is the matter in legislation relating to children. This article explains the arguments for and against the homogenizing rights of illegitimate children stating that advocates argue for homogenizing of children's rights, whether legitimate or illegitimate, with an emphasis on the principle of individualization of punishment They believe that considering some deprivation for natural children, while they normally have no role in the matter is contrary to justice and anyone should not be punished for the mistakes of others. In contrast, opponents state that the abolition of the statutory deprivation for these children is not only to the detriment of families, but it would weaken the foundation of them and cause in diminution of relative interests and also in damaging the children, who come into the existence through this way. Hence, with an awareness of the adverse consequences of failure to guarantee the generation of illegal relationships outside of the families, the Islamic legislator seeks to protect the health of generations and purity of people in the community. Because, in the Islamic religion, purity of parentage is one of the main intentions, so that many of the provisions have been issued in order to protect and preserve it. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  5 - Examining organ transplantation from the perspective of parties and French law
  reza kolahkaj فرج اله براتی seyedhesamh hosseini
  The majority of Shia and Sunni jurists consider organ transplant as absolutely permissible if it depends on the preservation of human life (whether Muslim or infidel), and if the preservation of human life does not depend on it, it is subject to other conditions that ar More

  The majority of Shia and Sunni jurists consider organ transplant as absolutely permissible if it depends on the preservation of human life (whether Muslim or infidel), and if the preservation of human life does not depend on it, it is subject to other conditions that are among the jurists. Imamia and Ahl al-Sunni are controversial. However, in American and European countries, including France, organ transplantation is permitted after five tests have been performed to diagnose brain death. In French law, brain death is considered death, and if brain death is confirmed, the use of organs is permitted. Brain-dead bodies are used for organ transplantation. The main question of this research is how organ transplantation is expressed from the point of view of subject law and foreign jurisprudence and French law? The hypothesis that is proposed for the main question of the research is: : It seems that in these different systems, the nature of all Shari'a and legal rulings is the same, and there is a difference between the binding of Muslim and non-Muslim members in unnecessary cases between the parties and French law, and in other cases, there is a special distinction in the field. There is no implementation of the link. The current research is a descriptive analytical method. The collection of information is based on the method of library collection. Quranic verses, authentic Islamic sources, jurisprudential books and hadiths were used to explain the separation of the soul from the body and the issue of death. Manuscript profile