Hamid Hamidian; Fateme Rajaiee; Alireza Pouresmaeili
Abstract
With the increase of legal pluralism in the contemporary international system, the interference of the areas of investment and human rights has increased. Therefore, the balance of these two areas is essential and this is nothing but encouraging investment and creating a balance in the investment environment ...
Read More
With the increase of legal pluralism in the contemporary international system, the interference of the areas of investment and human rights has increased. Therefore, the balance of these two areas is essential and this is nothing but encouraging investment and creating a balance in the investment environment based on human rights standards, which over time has shown itself in the investment arbitration jurisprudence. Is. In this article, it is tried based on the analysis of opinions in this field while identifying the limitations; Let's examine the common models of human rights citation in investment arbitration. Therefore, it seems that the existing legal procedure is vague, insufficient, contradictory and new. Therefore, it is necessary to look at the half-full glass based on the boldness of the proposal and the reference to human rights, and it cannot be denied that in many cases, the courts have an inherent desire for one-sided and biased arbitration in favor of the investment treaty. Of course, in this regard, the courts are afraid of leaving the jurisdiction and abuse of the host governments, and in this regard, the role of the citation of human rights based on the basic principles of international law and the framework of the investment treaty is very key for interpretation. The necessity of human rights action and The lack of other options must be proven in the court so that the judges can justify the violation of obligations based on that action.
Hamid Hamidian; Mansor Amini; Aliakbar Hokmabadi
Abstract
Any contract may face ambiguities in the execution phase that need to be interpreted. Courts usually interpret these ambiguities based on the discovery of the common intent of the parties. However, following the characteristics of the contract or the special situation of the parties in some contracts, ...
Read More
Any contract may face ambiguities in the execution phase that need to be interpreted. Courts usually interpret these ambiguities based on the discovery of the common intent of the parties. However, following the characteristics of the contract or the special situation of the parties in some contracts, special interpretative rules are applied to them. Therefore, the insurer may take advantage of this fragile situation of the insurer and its authoritarianism and adjust the insurance contract in line with your interests. Therefore, in order to support the legitimate expectations of the insurer and eliminate this inequality in the 1970s, a special method for interpreting insurance contracts under the "legitimate expectations method" emerged in the United States and experienced a change over several decades. Recent developments in this method indicate that the application of this rule is appropriate after proving unequal legal and economic situations. In Iranian law, this method is not directly mentioned, but in the interpretation of the contract, the courts are better instead of applying the dry rule. Interpretation against the insurer, apply this rule in line with the legitimate expectations of the insurer. In this study, we examine this doctrine and its role in the interpretation of insurance contracts.
Habib Talib Ahmadi; hamid hamidian
Abstract
Pre-contractual negotiations, as the main platform for creating legal obligations, can involve risks for the parties and lead to non-conclusion of the contract, spending preliminary expenses by one party, or concluding a shaky and breached contract. The two parties must be careful about what they say ...
Read More
Pre-contractual negotiations, as the main platform for creating legal obligations, can involve risks for the parties and lead to non-conclusion of the contract, spending preliminary expenses by one party, or concluding a shaky and breached contract. The two parties must be careful about what they say or do in the pre-contractual period; Because according to them, an action may be taken by the other party and as a result, the other party to the contract will be harmed. The duty of care is a legal obligation that is justified in order to avoid the occurrence of such damage to the other party through the fault of one party. This duty can be justified as a condition or implicit agreement in entering the pre-contractual stage. Economically, it prevents market failure and expands trading confidence. There is disagreement about the nature of this task. According to the classical approach, it is closer to non-contractual liability. However, according to a new approach, entering into negotiations can be considered as an agreement or an implicit condition for observing the duty of care during negotiations and a kind of contractual liability. In case of violation of this duty, according to the situation of guarantees such as, obligation to return to negotiation, compensation, obligation to conclude a contract and termination or cancellation of the contract can be reviewed and analyzed. This duty remains unknown in Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence. However, the duty of care can be determined based on the general rules of civil liability or the inference of an implicit contract based on the observance of the duty of care, as well as Article 35 of the Electronic Commerce Law and the guarantee of its implementation.
