Document Type : Scientific Research
Authors
1 Associate Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Administrative Science and Economics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
2 Ph.D. in Private Law, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
Different countries according to their legal system, each one assigns various definitions and examples to domicile, personal status, and nationality. For prevention of these disputes, the Hague Conference on Private International Law Organization, therefore, with the aim of uniformity of the rules of private international law, has decided to determine competent law and provide a unit definition of domicile by setting the Convention of 1955 relating to the settlement of the conflicts between the law of nationality and the law of domicile. Despite that, the domicile in English law and American, is the main factor of communication and even in French law it has been accepted as a secondary law, but in Iranian law this communication factor is not accepted as to the personal status as a secondary rule and in the case of stateless. Therefore, relating to these persons according to Article 7 of the Civil Code on the application of national law to the personal status of aliens, there is no choice, except les fori. In Iranian law, the only case that law of domicile, instead of law of nationality, can be determine competent law the personal status, it is envoi to Iranian law. While the principles of non-discrimination based on the necessity of applying, the same law to persons who lives in the territory of a state in some cases require the applying law of domicile. Therefore, in order to enforcing justice and preventing wasteful application of the lex fori, the acceptance of communication factor of domicile as a secondary rule especially in cases of personal status of stateless persons in our legal system is suggested.
Keywords
)