Comparetive study of conditions to bring action of intervention in Iran’s law and United States Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Faculty member at University of Ahwaz

Abstract

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.

Keywords

References

 
 Effron, Robin, (2011-2012) The Shadow Rules of Joinder, 100 Geo. L. J. 759, Available at: http://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/ faculty.
Fleming James Jr, (1963) Necessary and Indispensable parties, 18 U. Miami L. Rev. 68, Available at: http://repository.law.miami. edu/umlr/vol18/iss1/11.
 Gardner, Army L. (2002) "An Attempt to Intervention in the Confusion: Standing Requirements for Rule 24 Intervention", University of Chicago Law Review, Available at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/journal_articles.
Hutchings, Brian (1998) "Waiting for Divine Intervention: The Fifth Circuit Tries to Give Meaning to Intervention Rules in Sierra Club v. City of San Antonio", 43 vill.l. Rev.693, Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol43/iss3/4.
Katt, William J. (2009) Res Judicata and Rule 19, 103 NW, U.L. Rev. 401.
Manring, Gregory R. (2017) its time for an intervention: resolving the conflict between rule 24 (a) (2) and article III standing, Fordham University School of Law; B.A. 2013, New York University, vol 85, Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol85/iss5/23.
Murphy, Patrick D. (1995) A Federal Practitioner's Guide to Supplemental Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1367, 78 Marq. L. Rev. 973, Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette. edu/mulr/vol78/iss4/5
 Rensberger, Jeffrey L. (1982) Ancillary jurisdiction and intervention under Federal rule 24, Analysis and proposals, Indiana law Journal: vol. 58: Iss. 1, Article 3, Available at: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol58/iss1/3.
Stack, John W. (1962) Intervention of Right in Class Actions: The Dilemma of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2), 50 Cal. L. Rev. 8, Available at: http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/ californialawreview/vol50/iss1/5.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics