Electronic Petition: The Legal Nature and Challenges of Registration

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student in of Shiraz University

2 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law and Political Science of Shiraz University

10.22099/jls.2021.38758.4129

Abstract

AbstractNowadays, the use of electronic proceedings has been developed in various legal systems. In our legal system, the Judiciary now accepts and registers electronic petitions through the Electronic Judicial Service Offices. Most of the regulations governnig electronic filing of lawsuits are regulated by directive and bylaws and no specific provisions in this regard are found in Civil Procedure Code and other related regulations on this subject. So, in this article we will try to explain the Legal nature of electronic petition. In addition, various kinds of error or mistake in registration of contents of electronic petition and possible reliefs will be analysed. The findings of research show that electronic petition is an unofficial secure electronic document and withdrawal or modification of the error contents, although essentially possible, shall be subject to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code accordiong to the case. This means that, as far as possible, the nature of corrective action or approach should be adapted to the well-known titles and institutions in civil procedure, such as the return of a petition or litigation, the increase or decrease or change of claim, and the completion or explanation of the petition, while observing the rules governing each of them. The results of this research may improve the quality, the speed and the accuracy of proceedings.

Keywords


Model Notary Act (2010) published by US national Notary Association.
UNIFORM ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS ACT (1999) Approved by the American Bar Association Dallas, Texas, February 14, 2000
UNCITRA Model Law on Electronic Commerce Guide to Enactment (1996) Retrived from http://www.uncitral.org/english/texts/elecom/ml.html
UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Signatures with Guide to Enactment (2001).