One of the most important cases in the contractual field is breach of the contract by a contracting party and the resultant damages. Regarding the fact that injured party has incurred some post-breach expenditure like the expense of returning the goods, legislators have passed some Acts in order to support the injured party and ensure the economic relationships. This legislative procedure can be seen in the COMMON LAW, Civil LAW and Islamic LAW systems. The question can be asked in relation to the incidental damages, in relation to these damages nature and the broad of compensation. In conclusion, this article has been comprised in incidental damages, in comparison of legal systems get to the end that in all legal systems, principally has been thought some solution to compensating of incidental damages. Of course with some diversity in the broadness of compensation will be presented in the article text.

This paper examined the charge of circulating assets in COMMON LAW jurisdiction. The aim was to know the way and basis that it is constituted and to find out its profits for creditors and also to find out its meaning and its impacts in market. The conclusion was that floating charge provides an appropriate security and benefits for the chargee and chargor, where chargee can achieve his benefits and chargor can carry on his ordinary course of business. In this kind of charges third parties’ rights have been supporting as well. In addition the assets in the ordinary course of business are the main part of the company’s assets and depositing them as a floating charge will increase the capital of the company, will improve the efficiency of economy and will give creditable security to banks and financial institutions and it will have benefits for economy.

Rescue and salvage operations take place in many sea voyages. Numerous technical and legal problems may arise in these operations. The vessel which proceeds to do this operation normally performs another job. By this operation, the vessel breaches her job contract. The rescue ships usually incur a lot of costs and damages in order to perform rescue operation. There are always many challenges regarding costs and damages of rescuer in addition to the damages which the vessel may cause to the rescued ship. The rescue operation is a legal duty of ship masters; however, there should be a logic and legal method for compensating the damages. This job is carried out either for the purpose of an economic interest or it is done morally on the basis of beneficence. This article, first, deals with legal aspects of the rescue and salvage operations on basis of international conventions, COMMON LAW, civil LAW and Iranian LAW. It then examines different methods for compensation.

The Internet, due to its global scope, easy access, cheapness and possibility in global communication, is the endless world, and has important role in developing and/or destructing countries. If it is used to make peace, economic security and positive communication, then it will be considered as proper technology for the countries; however, if it is used to violate privacy, intellectual ownership rights, insult, defamation and software malfunctions, it will affect inversely. Toutilize this new world, it is necessary to create an integrated system including controlled rules with related needs. In this paper, the accepted models of legal society are studied as a system to legitimate the internet in Iran, UK and USA. In this regard, international LAW has high exclusive capability to legitimate this space. These studies lead us toward a proper legal system with legitimated Internet.

This sentence is what a prominent English judge has said about the power of judges in dealing with cases in English LAW. An example of this power can be found in contractual terms for damages called Penalties and Liquidated Damages.As it is expected, contracts are basically made to be performed and not to be avoided according to the whims of market fluctuation. However, the adherence to freedom of contract does not mean leaving the parties totally unattended, but providing adequate legislation and rules for the support and protection of the weak, and then allowing the market to work in their interest freely.The study of agreed damages clauses in English LAW reveals that Penalty and Liquidated Damages Doctrine will work somewhat different from what is said above. What has persuaded some English judges to adhere to this doctrine, besides their general concern for justice, was the angle that they used to see and construe agreed damages amounts in contracts. They always considered this amount as an estimated compensation for the loss suffered through a breach.In this article I will try to explain the above theory and its development in English LAW, which later affected the LAWs of all other COMMON LAW countries. I will show how an agreement on damages are construed by judges and on what basis they will find it either enforceable or avoidable, and what happens if they adhere to the latter.I also will attempt to show how traditional policy of intervening in agreed damages clauses has affected the legal character of these clauses in English LAW.

Limited companies by shares in "concession theory" are nothing but an artificial being that is widely influenced by government regulations and possesses only those properties which the charter of its creation confers upon it. Except for some references, in Iranian legal doctrine, not enough attention has been paid to this theory. The main elements and features of the concession theory in COMMON LAW are: principle of no capacity to act as a body corporate without positive authorization, stakeholder primacy, serve to public interest, extensive government intervention in corporate LAW, priority of mandatory rules in company LAW, and duality of company LAW and private LAW and its tendency to public LAW. Also in this theory, corporation’s legal power is derived from the state. In the article, by comparative study of COMMON LAW system, the concept, effects and challenges of concession theory have been studied and according to the findings of this study, the place of this theory has been studied in the Iranian company LAW. Through this, development of effects of this theory has been criticized in the LAWs, regulations, bills and legal doctrine of Iran and the procedures of corporate registration authority. This article is looking for an answer to this question that what is the place of the concession theory in COMMON LAW and Iran’s company LAW, and what are the advantages and disadvantages of this position for Iran’s company LAW? Looking at the effects of concession theory in the COMMON LAW systems and comparing it with the Iranian legal system, the article proves that although this theory is not well known in the Iranian legal system, the prevailing logic and effects of this theory can be clearly seen in the existing LAWs and bills on joint stock companies. However, the COMMON LAW systems have passed this theory except in exceptional cases. In Iran’s company LAW, the basis and logic of this theory can be seen in the Commercial Code and its amendments, Commercial Bill, legal doctrine and the procedures of the company registration authority. Some examples are: 1-As mentioned, the capacity of the company are deemed to originate from the (state) LAW, 2-providing public interest is more important than aims such as shareholder wealth maximization, 3-strictness is observed in company registration procedures, 4-several mandatory rules imposed on companies, 5-there is not enough desire to reduce the burden of regulations governing companies, 6-the scope of activities of the company is important, and going beyond the limits of the company's authority contained in the company's constitution is an inexorable taboo, etc. Therefore, the concession theory can be considered as one of the important theoretical foundations governing the company LAW in Iran, and by referring to the changes and developments of the COMMON LAW in reducing the influence of this theory and replacing it with other theories, especially contract theory, It can be concluded that the existence of the basis and logic of concession theory in Iran's company LAW can be criticized. Furthermore, considering the existence of numerous reasons and indications that the Iran's company LAW follow other theoretical bases such as contractual and legal person theories, in the description of the current state of Iran's company LAW, it can be said that several, sometimes conflicting theoretical bases govern Iran's company LAW. As an efficient solution, this article suggests that company LAW forsakes the concession theory and moves towards the contract theory, because it is more compatible with our legal foundations, gives the company LAW an independent identity from public LAW, creates greater compliance with the general policies, is more consistent with COMMON LAW experience, by emphasizing the efficiency and reducing transaction costs, helps companies in playing their main role in the economy, by reducing the role of mandatory rules and emphasizing the importance of default rules, defines an efficient role for the state in company LAW and increases creativity in company's constitution. Commercial Bill, which is in the process of approval by the Iranian Parliament, is the most important document and the best opportunity to adopt such approaches.

Transsexualism is one of the most challenging social phenomenon in the world. Some of the people consider it as an abnormal behavior and some of the physicians think of it as a disease that must be cured. There are some methods for its treatment the most important of them is changing sexuality through surgery. Since LAW seeks to control the social relations, the position of LAW as to this problem must become clear. So the vital question is: what is our legal system’s response? In this paper, after difining changing sexuality legally and medically and explaining jurisprudential and legal opinions, I conclude that in Iranian legal system in the case of necessity the judge can permit changing sexuality.

Economic problems constitute one of the major criss facing human society. One of these problems are the wrongdoings committed in the process of supplying goods to the market. In an attempt to prevent these and to protect consumers, some legal systems have criminalized such behaviour. This issue is examined in this article with reference to Islamic (Imamiyya) jurisprudence, Iranian LAW and COMMON LAW.

In many cases, different LAWs may govern various aspects of a dispute raised in international arbitration, and this raises the need for the parties to the dispute and the arbitrators to adopt a reasonable approach to proving the content of these LAWs. in these cases, given the lack of a COMMON legal framework such as that provided for in domestic LAWs, determining the role of the arbitral tribunal and the parties to the dispute in relation to proving the content of the governing LAWs and the way of proving the said content is considered a serious challenge.in any case, national legal approaches as to the way of proving foreign LAW in a dispute raised before a domestic court are effective in answering the above questions; In explaining this, it should be said that COMMON LAW jurists often believe that the parties and their LAWyers are obliged to prove the governing LAW by presenting statement of defence to international arbitrators. In contrast, jurists in civil LAW countries, while relying on the presumption of "the judge's knowledge of the LAW," usually believe that the arbitral tribunal has the authority or duty to investigate the content of the LAW governing the dispute through the use of a legal expert. In explaining the assumptions of this article, it should be noted that the different approach of the two legal systems of civil LAW and COMMON LAW as to procedural rules has led to differences in the roles of the parties to the dispute and the investigating authority; the method of proving foreign LAW; the method of selecting an expert; and the probative value of an oral hearing. in this article, with an analytical-comparative approach and using library resources, the advantages and disadvantages of the aforementioned approaches are examined. Finally, with the aim of achieving "best international precedent", while providing necessary guidelines to actors in the field of international arbitration, the role of the parties involved in international arbitration in proving the content of the LAWs governing the dispute and the method of proving them are discussed.