Feasibility of Describing the Primary Judgment in The Appeals Court: Judgment in Unknown Type to Verdict Or order

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD, Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran. Iran.

2 L.L.M, Faculty of Judicial Registration and Management, University of Judicial Sciences & Administrative Services, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The title selected by a judge for its final decision is one of the crucial elements in judicial proceedings and based on law, it may be judgment or writ. Although there exists a legal standard for choosing a judicial decision's title, the jurisprudences of Iranian courts illustrate that the mistake and negligence in selecting the type of judicial decision are probable. It is impossible that the judge himself can vary the decision's type after issuing it because such a change leads to modifying the basics of the decision that it was banned by regulations. Given that any type of judicial decision has special effects on proceedings and rights of members of action and its type remains unknown can violate their rights, it is necessary that the appellate court interfere to correct its type in respect of the jurisdiction of corrective proceedings. By using a way descriptive-analytical manner and with library resources and jurisprudences, firstly, it was investigated the theoretical basics and the source jurisdiction of the appeal courts in describing the type of judicial decision and its legal standard. Secondly, we researched the feasibility study of describing the type of unknown type decisions to judgment or writ in this paper. To conclude, the article showed that the appeal courts do not have permission to describe the type of unknown type judicial decisions for protecting the rights of persons and the proper implementation of the current regulations. However. it is presented several suggestions for amending civil procedural law.

Keywords

Main Subjects