This article discusses how the standard of compensation for expropriation of foreign investments employed by international investment tribunals can affect State parties’,preferences reflected in international investment agreements as well as the efficiency of these standards in light of an economic analysis of law. It is suggested that State parties to these agreements often pursue their own economic development as well as protecting their nationals who invest in the territory of the other contracting State. In so doing, the State parties try to diminish the externalities associated with their measures and decisions on foreign investors on the one hand, and to reduce the risk of investment in their territory for foreign investors, on the other. By comparing the standard of full reparation established in customary international law to the standard of prompt, adequate, and effective compensation due immediately before the expropriation, usually agreed upon in investment agreements, this article concludes that the former standard-i. e. the standard of full reparation-is not entirely compatible with the preferences of State parties to international investment agreements and, thus, cannot always be considered as an efficient standard.

The law of fracture diya is accepted by majority of Faqihs. The law states that bone fracture diya with recovery in diya limbs equals one fifth of amputation diya and, in case of complete recovery, is four fifth of that one fifth of amputation diya. The book of Zarif, as the main document of this law, is reflected in Fagihs books. A comparative study of fiqh statements with those in the book of Zarif, leads us to different laws than those mentioned by Faqihs, and this has been studied by some other Faqihs. In legislation, the criminal law has generally accepted this law in clause of 569, and in the process of implementation, based on the specialty needed to determine the degree of bone fracture, the clause of 136 of criminal procedure stipulates that the inspector should satisfy the experts in Legal Medicine Organization wherein defined laws already exist. In practice, there exist three viewpoints for fracture bone diya, that is, Faqihs statements, criminal law, and medical process. Besides practicing problems in legislation, they are in court. The present article tries to study this law, its reflection in the law, and examine solution for its implementation problems, and then some suggestions are presented.

The rule of wasting is one of the most important rules by which issues related to liability (ḍ amā n) and civil liability in Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) and law are resolved. In each civil law and the Islamic Penal Code, this rule is considered as a basis and source of liability. At first glance, arguing for this rule does not seem difficult. However, a careful logical and realistic analysis shows that this requires various prerequisites. The most important challenge and issue in enforcing this principle is to explain the concept of "wasting" and in particular to provide a more objective and quantitative criterion for it. The objective of this study is to solve this problem through a descriptive and analytical method. Our jurisprudential and legal literature in this regard is not as big as the scientific literature of principles such as "ḍ amā n Yad (liability of possession)" and "negation of harm". However, the findings of the study suggest that the great Imamiyah jurists have made valuable efforts to standardize and regulate this rule. The evaluation and examination of these perspectives will lead to the development of our jurisprudential and legal literature in this field. Some believe that with the approval of the new Islamic Penal Code, wasting as "being able to be documented" has been accepted as the sole basis of the civil liability for a crime, but the author of this article does not agree with the adequacy of this view and believes that the necessary elements for the realization of conventional documentation should also be explained in a clear way.

One of the main difficulties of conceptual and particularly realization-based dependence of moral attributes on religion is the irregularity of God’s will and voluntary actions and hence arbitrariness of morality derived from it. According to this critique, divine will and reluctance or command and prohibition without criteria and standards can shape moral concepts such as good and bad or at least have an influence on qualification of human actions to the predicates. But some philosophers and theologians, apart from other critiques against these two versions of religious morality, have attempted to resolve this problem by accommodating some determining factors in God, invoking to logical contradiction of bad actions, favour to attributes as divine simplicity and the like. These answers essentially have been incapable of solving this problem unless we consider the real object of God’s will and the fixed subjects of ethical propositions.

Islamic Sharia has established a rule named " gharar " in order to back up and guarantee transactions and prevent loss or conflicts among those involved. This rule helps each trader or investor feel secure when entering into the transaction. The survey of religious books shows that there are different views about gharar criteria. Since financial markets face growing risks and uncertainty, providing clear criteria for gharar can prevent people from entering into transactions with unacceptable risks or the ones considered to be void. The concept of gharar is a challenging one due to its various definitions and criteria presented by jurists. Some of these have pointed out ignorance in a contract and others have focused on the ignorance which leads to danger or risk. This study used descriptive and analytical methods to offer both the literal and technical definition of gharar together with its criteria in new transactions. It has also categorized the opinions of jurists and planned an interview with contemporary jurisprudents. The aim is to provide a clear benchmark for distinguishing between gharar in new transactions and those with high risks.

According to Imami jurisprudence and the Islamic Penal Code of Iran, committing adultery in some circumstances may result in a minimum punishment and in other circumstances, may be subject to a maximum punishment. This issue is very important in the penal system of Islam and the criminal laws of Iran. Considering that one of the examples of the application of the minimum punishment is the Lack of Ehsan for a man or a woman, and according to Article 227 of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran, travel excludes husband and wife from the Ehsan, This question is raised that traveling in the absolute sense can cause the perpetrator of adultery to leave the Ehsan or other conditions are necessary? Considering the descriptive-analytical study of the views presented in this research, it seems that the basic feature of Ehsan for passengers is the existence of a customary ability to have a marital relationship with the wife or husband at any time he or she wants. On the other hand, presenting a model of religious distance as a criterion for leaving Ehsan is contrary to the content of popular narrations. Therefore, determining the religious distance as a criterion for leaving Ehsan will not be compatible with the criterion of customary ability as the famous saying of the jurists, which has been discussed in detail.