Mohammad Hassan Sadeghy moghadam; hojat allah moradi
Abstract
There is less interest in discrediting Jurisprudence in the context of mortgage. Even those who don’t consider the bill a condition of the validity or necessity of the mortgage, still oppose the interest mortgage. The reason for invalidating the interests of mortgages can't ...
Read More
There is less interest in discrediting Jurisprudence in the context of mortgage. Even those who don’t consider the bill a condition of the validity or necessity of the mortgage, still oppose the interest mortgage. The reason for invalidating the interests of mortgages can't be divided in to two main categories. The first category is the reason that the bill is considered a condition of the mortgage. With the condition of knowing the bill and recognizing the interests of the debtor. The interests of mortgages are not automatically eliminated. The second group regardless of the condition of the bill consider mortgage as opposite of jurists property must have characteristics that an satisfy the ultimate desirability of mortgages in security, Because the interest bill is slowly being created. It is not possible to get it. But all these reason are disputed. The necessity to own the property id to the conditional of the bill. If the bill requirement is removed is removed the need for objectivity is also eliminated. Buying and selling money is not the only way to get money. This is because we can achieve this goal by renting property.
Mohammad Hassan Sadeghi Moghadam; Mojtaba Eshraghi Arani
mohammad hasan sadeghi moghadam; mojtaba shafie zadeh khulenjani
Volume 3, Issue 9 , December 2015, , Pages 101-122
Abstract
Abstract The creditor is entitled to collect the debt from the debtor. The possibility of collecting the debt through the debtor’s body organs is a disputable issue. By explaining different ways of collecting the debt from the defaulting debtor, such as compelling him to pay his debt, the ...
Read More
Abstract The creditor is entitled to collect the debt from the debtor. The possibility of collecting the debt through the debtor’s body organs is a disputable issue. By explaining different ways of collecting the debt from the defaulting debtor, such as compelling him to pay his debt, the court’s order for the payment of the debt from the debtor’s property, imprisonment and the rules relating to insolvency, this article examines the possibility of collecting the debt from the debtor’s body organs. The issue is whether human being has such a control over his body organs for marketability of these organs and to transfer them. By taking into consideration the fact that the body organs have market value and human being have dominion, but not ownership, over their body organs, it can be concluded that the body organs are not part of the debtor’s property. Thus, it is not possible to compel the debtor to cut his body organs for the payment of his debt. It is not also possible to cut his body organs in return for his debt when he is dead. But if the dead’s organs are sold, they can be given in place of his debt.
MOHAMMAHHASAN SADEGHMOGHADDAM; HADI SHABANIKANDSARI; MAHDI SOKHANVAR
Volume 2, Issue 6 , February 2015, , Pages 7-31
Abstract
This article examines the ambiguous testament in Shi'ite jurisprudence and Iran law. The purpose of this article is to present a criterion for determining the ambiguous testamentary property and heirs’ authority range in determining its amount. The questions dealt with are whether the remarked ...
Read More
This article examines the ambiguous testament in Shi'ite jurisprudence and Iran law. The purpose of this article is to present a criterion for determining the ambiguous testamentary property and heirs’ authority range in determining its amount. The questions dealt with are whether the remarked narratives (Revayat) on determining the amount of the testamentary property are applicable in Iran law or not, and whether accepting another rule in Iran law is against the jurisprudence. Moreover, the question is: Is the determination of the testamentary property a condition for the validity of that? The conclusion is that the narratives on determining the ambiguous testament are exclusive of Arab societies and languages. Hence, it is not possible to treat it as a criterion in Iran law. It is rather necessary to consider all of them under a unitary rule and entitles the heirs to determine it based on a general rule. Having said that, the heirs are not completely free in this respect, that is to say, they should determine it in accordance with the ‘will’ and volition of testator as well as with the standard of reasonableness. Therefore, in the possessive testament, the determination of the testamentary property is also a condition which is met by entitling the heirs to specify it. In addition, if heirs do not determine the testamentary or if it is not feasible to refer to them, judge will determine the amount of testamentary.
Mohammad Hasan Sadeghi Moghadam; Seyeed Mohammad Tabatabai Nejad
Volume 1, Issue 2 , February 2013, , Pages 89-115
Abstract
Non-Disclosure Agreement(NDA), also known as a confidentiality agreement, or secrecy agreement, is a legal contract between at least two parties that outlines confidential material, knowledge, or information that the parties wish to share with one another for certain purposes, but wish to restrict access ...
Read More
Non-Disclosure Agreement(NDA), also known as a confidentiality agreement, or secrecy agreement, is a legal contract between at least two parties that outlines confidential material, knowledge, or information that the parties wish to share with one another for certain purposes, but wish to restrict access to by third parties. It is a contract through which the parties agree not to disclose information covered by the agreement. An NDA creates a confidential relationship between the parties to protect any type of confidential and proprietary information or trade secrets. As such, an NDA protects non-public business information. In this article we examine the structure and elements of the contract, and compare it in some respects with other kinds of securing intellectual property such as patent. In conclusion we understand that although this contract is an efficient model of securing information but it is not an enough one, so every company involved in the field of the information, shall use different kinds of protection to work complementary
