نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 پردیس البرز، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
2 گروه حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
3 دانشیار، گروه حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Small claims, despite their limited monetary value, are among the most significant areas of civil litigation in terms of frequency and social impact, and the quality of the judicial system’s response to them is directly linked to citizens’ access to justice. In Iranian law, although a considerable portion of judicial referrals are small in nature, no independent legal definition or dedicated procedural regime has yet been provided for such claims, and these claims are dispersed among general courts, Dispute Resolution Councils, and Peace Courts. The present research, employing a descriptive-analytical method and a comparative study of the legal systems of England and France, has analyzed the pathologies of the existing system. The findings indicate that the absence of an independent legal definition and dedicated procedure, inconsistency and ambiguity in jurisdiction, weakness of a conciliation-oriented approach, distance from online dispute resolution, lack of a class action mechanism, and shortage of statistical data are the most significant pathologies in this field. Accordingly, a procedural composite model with eight pillars is proposed: a Small Claims Procedure Code; a two-tier legal definition with a dynamic financial threshold; transformation of Dispute Resolution Councils into a specialized authority for mediation and conciliation; development of private mediation institutions; conversion of the Peace Court into a Small Claims Court; establishment of alternative dispute resolution and online dispute resolution; provision for a class action mechanism; and phased, data-driven implementation of the model.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)