Examining the Retrial for Conflicting Two Rulings Emphasizing the "Same Court" Element in the Light of Doctrine and Judicial Procedure
Two people sign a contract with each other in Isfahan and the place of fulfillment of the commitment is Tehran. The first party files a lawsuit against the defendant in Tehran once, and the verdict is issued against him. He brings the same lawsuit without changing the legal reason in Isfahan for the...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Shahr-e- Danesh Research And Study Institute of Law
2024-09-01
|
| Series: | پژوهشهای حقوقی |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://jlr.sdil.ac.ir/article_202050_53c45503e8e85f785230ac8f82e34c1a.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Two people sign a contract with each other in Isfahan and the place of fulfillment of the commitment is Tehran. The first party files a lawsuit against the defendant in Tehran once, and the verdict is issued against him. He brings the same lawsuit without changing the legal reason in Isfahan for the second time. The defendant is not informed about the new lawsuit, or he does not go to court to defend himself, thinking that the court will again issue a verdict in his favor. The verdict, however, will be issued in favor of the plaintiff. According to the Civil Procedure Law, if two judgments are contradictory with the same subject, cause and, parties, the second judgment will have the possibility of retrial. By interpreting "the same court" as "unity in the branch" or "unity in the jurisdiction" which is accepted by the doctrine and judicial procedure, the reinstatement of proceedings is eliminated. In this article, the above viewpoints are criticized and with a comparative study and a review of the former civil procedure laws, the view of the unity of class and type is accepted. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1682-9220 2717-0020 |