Khalil Ahmadi Faculty member at University of Ahwaz author text article 2020 per Intervention is one of the ancillary suits that should have the same origin or related to the original action so that the court can consider them altogether. According to 133 article of civil procedure the court is responsible to deal with the both claims simultaneously, only if the result of the main claim is dependent on the result of the intervention. In case that the main claim is not related to intervention, it is not necessary for the court to deal with them together. To be the beneficiary of the subordinate intervention may be in the form of possible interest or subordinate interest. On the basis that the intervener has a possible or subordinate interest in intervening the claim, the condition and proceeding of intervention would be different. This article is allocated to describe action. Basic of article is Iran’s law, as well as comparative study with of American’s federal civil procedure is conducted. Shiraz University 2008-7926 12 v. 2 no. 2020 1 34 https://jls.shirazu.ac.ir/article_5777_a237215c89869db6fb6828c088a536da.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22099/jls.2020.29773.2981 Azam Amini Assistant professor, Law and Political Science of Ferdowsi, Mashhad author Vahid Bazzar P.H.D of International Law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University author text article 2020 per On January 8, 2020, Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752, which was flying from Tehran to Ukraine, was hit by a missile shortly after takeoff and killed all its passengers. The General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran has issued a statement declaring that the firing on the aircraft was because of the human error and a mistake by the Iranian Air Defense in determining the nature of the aircraft. This article, which uses a descriptive-analytical method in conducting research, addresses the main question of who is responsible for civil and criminal responsibility for this incident, and how is it possible to repair the damages caused by this incident? The air defense action, which can be attributed to Iran, violates Iran's international obligations, including the obligations under the International Civil Aviation Convention (1944), and raises the international responsibility of Iran. following the mechanism provided for in the International Convention on Civil Aviation. However, Iran could pursue its good actions in accepting firefighting and expressing its regret, with measures such as effective prosecution of those involved and negotiating with the victims' State of nationality and compensation and satisfaction of its families and Prevent more severe consequences by resort to the International Court of Justice or the International Criminal Court or national courts. Shiraz University 2008-7926 12 v. 2 no. 2020 35 58 https://jls.shirazu.ac.ir/article_5775_0208a9f4529fe5211237b9dcc7fc301c.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22099/jls.2020.36652.3825 zahra akrami Judge and lecturer author Ali Asghar Hatami Associate Professor at Shiraz University author text article 2020 per One of the barriers to effective execution of the sentence is the ease of evading the conviction by proving bankruptcy and debt split. A conviction is a means by which the convicted person can use it in a positive and almost easy manner to prevent an immediate execution of the sentence, and often the truth of the person's financial situation remains hidden. Predicting the widespread possibility of proof of wrongdoing causes abuse and thereby impedes the execution of the sentence. Any lawsuit requires rules that are formal and substantive, but laws are subject to legal and judicial interpretations to address ambiguities and issues after they become effective. Issues such as whether the lawsuit is valid? What types of financial convictions can be filed? What is the Guarantee of Failure to Submit a Property Statement or a Testimony Attachment? And is it possible that all the positive evidence can be substantiated in proof of a claim of wrongdoing? In this article we have the opportunity to review it. Shiraz University 2008-7926 12 v. 2 no. 2020 59 100 https://jls.shirazu.ac.ir/article_5776_91781cf116e26b649a5e10af08fef9df.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22099/jls.2020.35514.3689 Mohammad Rasekh Professor of public law, public law department, law faculty, university of Shahid Beheshti Tehran, Iran author Shirin Boroomand Department of public law, Law Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran author text article 2020 per The discourse of global justice at transnational levels has given rise to important challenges . The impact of this theory on nationally discussed concepts forms an important part of such theoretical challenges. Law, which has been so far understood as a state-made concept, is now in need of a new theoretical pattern due to its relationship with theory of global justice. Accordingly, the main question of this research is whether global justice theory can change our conception of law at both national and global levels. To answer this question, upon a brief explanation of the issue of global justice and providing a short picture of law, we will examine the impact of integrated and non-integrated approaches to global justice on this brief picture. While non-integrated perspectives do not seem to be sufficient, integrated perspectives seem unrealizable in the current power structure of the world. Accordingly, given diverse human identities and relationships, relational and non-relational grounds of justice, and insufficiency of international morality, we may only come up with a moderate outlook on global justice; under which, law is bound to be defined somewhere between two poles of certainty and responsiveness. The limited but inevitable competence of states in the contemporary world and the balanced spectrum of integrated approach to justice are, respectively, embodiments of the two mentioned poles. Shiraz University 2008-7926 12 v. 2 no. 2020 101 129 https://jls.shirazu.ac.ir/article_5774_4617b88b288fdb894daea0caa0519e99.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22099/jls.2020.34158.3511 Mahin Sobhani Assistant Professor at University of Guilan author Nadia Bagheri Student in Criminal Law and Criminology, Department of Criminal and Criminology Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehran, Iran. author text article 2020 per Statute of the international criminal tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the Statute of the International Criminal Court did not refer to the “accessory”, but merely pointed out examples of assistance in the commission of international crimes such as, planning, instigation, aiding and abetting. There is an important question that if those modes of assistance in the commission of international crimes can be regarded as accessory liability to commit an international crime. Does accessory liability can give rise to less severe criminal liability and then lighter punishment? So, this paper examining various criteria to distinguish between principals and accessories concludes that despite the lack of reference to accessory liability in the statutes of international criminal courts, in practice, they confirm the existence of some modes of accessory liability by reference to the test of control of crime. In fact, those who have "control over the commission of the offence" are perpetrators. As a result, those do not have control over the commission of the crime are accessories. Each mode of Accessory Liability has distinct definitions and requirements, and there is a hierarchical relationship between them. This distinction is intended to provide a true picture of the role of perpetrators of international crimes. However, this does not necessarily lead to less severe punishments for accessories. Shiraz University 2008-7926 12 v. 2 no. 2020 131 162 https://jls.shirazu.ac.ir/article_5771_97dbfdf35809e22bacf763c706666124.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22099/jls.2020.5771 nahid safari university of maraghe- law departement author Artin Jahanshahi Law student, Maragheh university author text article 2020 per Contingency fee is one of the common institutions of common law legal system particularly in the united state. In this type of fees, the payment of fee is conditional to the results of lawsuit. So if the lawsuit fails, no fee would be paid to the lawyer and if the lawsuit is successful, more than usual amount or a pecent of condemned amount will be paid. Despite accepting theses agreement in some legal systems, there are some limitations in order to make conformity with their own legal system which make different, the importance and functions of it in compare with the U.S. In some legal systems, other institutions with the same function are predicted too. In Iran legal system, despite of freedom of contract, according to article 80 of the law of attorney regulations, a type of contingency fees which is a part of a demand are prohibited. This paper with a comparative attitude and with insisting on U.S legal system and clarifiying the conditional and contingency fees and its advantages and disadvantages, defend the accepting of it in Iran legal system. Shiraz University 2008-7926 12 v. 2 no. 2020 163 194 https://jls.shirazu.ac.ir/article_5772_c543a4da88074c98616cecacb3839c31.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22099/jls.2020.34416.3538 Afshin Abdollahi Assistant Professor of Law Department, University of Kurdistan author text article 2020 per After suffering punishment, one of the main concerns of the offender is the ability to return to society and enjoy social rights until be protected from hazards such as labeling. Hence the ratification of a comprehensive and far-reaching regulation about the restoration of dignity is one of the important tasks of the legislature. With the adoption of the Islamic Penal Code, it was expected that after specialized bachelors and complains taken to the rules before, Legal material with high precision should be approved until the rights of the community and the delinquent to be secured. By looking at Articles 25 and 26 of the Islamic Penal Code regarding the restoration of dignity, many issues and ambiguities can be cited which its status is not clear in the criminal proceedings and in many cases with false commentary it can lead to delinquent disadvantages. On this basis, the main question is that what ambiguities and challenges are about subordinate punishments. The article is divided into two parts of obstacles including restoration of dignity and delinquency problems during the period after the criminal process. And with a critical look, it sought to answer this question until to highlight these bugs and to try the legislator will correct them in future revisions and eventually judicial authorities, criminals and citizens will be out of wandering. Shiraz University 2008-7926 12 v. 2 no. 2020 195 229 https://jls.shirazu.ac.ir/article_5770_93eb5dec8f7b8d935947f20d558853ec.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22099/jls.2020.31956.3220 Ali Fotuhirad Assistant Professor at Islamic Azad University of Mashhad author text article 2020 per The primary function of the check is that it is used as ainstrument in commercial and non-commercial transactions. In order to fulfill this role, the order for payment of the amount stated in the instrument must be immediate. However, the identification of certain features, and as well as the principles governing this instrument, have led individuals to issue promising check or as a guarantee instrument. An issue that seems to run counter to its function. The use of checks in this regard raises the question of whether such writing may be subject to the rules governing on negotiable instruments . This paper is based on the check that although promising checks are contrary to the primary function of this instrument as an instant payment instrument, , features and principles governing negotiable instruments, as amended by the Issuing Check Law. However, issuing a check to ensure that the objective obligations of this instrument are met by the issue and function of this instrument as an instant payment instrument not only excludes it from the rules and regulations governing check and generally negotiable instruments, but also checks in that regard as a guarantee instrument. Like a bank guarantee, it cannot be recovered unless it is required to fulfill the original obligation and to prove that it has not been fulfilled. Shiraz University 2008-7926 12 v. 2 no. 2020 231 262 https://jls.shirazu.ac.ir/article_5773_492e9dd337b0aa37229ef44d969c0d1c.pdf dx.doi.org/10.22099/jls.2020.5773