The precautionary PRINCIPLE has been widely discussed in academic, legal and political areas. Debates stem due to various definitions and wordings of the PRINCIPLE and the fact that it has been reflected in both binding and nonbinding international instruments in various fields. The role of the European Union and its members is undisputed in the evolution of the PRINCIPLE. It can be found in different contexts; from its statements in international disputes to Jurisprudence of its judicial organs. This paper, with an analytical-descriptive approach, examines the situation of the precautionary PRINCIPLE in Domestic legal systems of European countries, primary and secondary rules of the EU and the jurisprudence of general courts, ECJ and ECHR to prove or deny the CUSTOMARY nature of the PRINCIPLE in this region.

It took humankind a long time to realize its inability to understand different aspects of environmental risks and find that it would bear irreversible damage if such a risk occurs.Knowing the vulnerability of the environment and the limitations of science to accurately predict threats to it, led to emerging the precautionary PRINCIPLE. This concept has stemmed from domestic legal systems and is being developed in international law. Various Formulations of the PRINCIPLE and its including in binding and nonbinding international instruments in varied fields have resulted in controversial discussions between states, Tribunals and Commentators on Its legal status in International law. They are at least divided into two groups: some who are on CUSTOMARY status of the PRINCIPLE and some who entitle it as a general PRINCIPLE of law.This paper examines different views towards the legal status of the precautionary PRINCIPLE in International law and try to give a reasonable opinion at the end.

A double ambiguity has been charged against Rawls’s difference PRINCIPLE (DP). Is it Maximin, Leximin, or something else? Usually, following A. Sen, scholars identify DP with the so-called Leximin. One argues here that one has to distinguish 1° the Leximin, 2° the Maximin (as rule of justice formally analogous to the maximin rule of decision), represented by the figure in L of the perfectly substitutable goods, and 3° the genuine DP. When the augmentation of inequality benefits the worse off, only Pareto-strong improvements are permitted. Leximin would also permit Pareto-weak improvements too (after the first maximum D), where only the richest improves: from (2, 3) to (2, 5), say. This is forbidden by DP. With two classes, unlike Maximin, DP has no curve of indifference and is always decisive, as Leximin is. For undecisive Rules of Justice, which admit indifferent curves, I propose to add a lexically secondary rule, to break ties. That move is able to clarify the links and the differences between on the one hand Maximin alone, with its typical indifference curves in L, and on the other hand, the DP properly understood and the Leximin, which both have no indifferent curves. With two classes of persons (best off/worse off), DP appears more egalitarian than Leximin, because it's secondary rule is MinIn (Minimization of Inequality). But the intuition behind the distinction is that it cannot possible “fair” that only the best off improves in a productive social cooperation.

CUSTOMARY Criminal Code (1916) is the first substantial code in Iranian criminal law. This Code is ratified about 38 years after Counte Code (1879). Its importance is that it makes the substructures of its post criminal codes. This Code is very important due to new division of crimes, penalties and explanations of Counte Code which was unprecedented. These regulations show Iranian criminal law developments and Iranian legal social culture in 100 years ago. Many of current criminal law organizations go back to even pre-constitutional period. Recognition of the typology of crime and punishment in CUSTOMARY penal code is of great importance. So that, this law has many effects in criminalization, the new division of crimes, determination of various penalties, especially imprisonment, identification of different institutions and PRINCIPLEs predictions such as the PRINCIPLE of legality of crimes and punishments on the penal codes after itself (from 1304 to 1392). The crimes divided into three groups of crimes against persons, property and security the first time was done by this law and the sentence of imprisonment organized and widespread in this way entered into Iran Criminal Law System. In the present article explain the penological analysis of CUSTOMARY Penal Code and the statement of the penals system of this law and penological evaluation based on the functions of punishment.

Faqihs are from amongst people and have two distinct juridical and CUSTOMARY states. They sometimes engage with Fiqh (delivering rulings from religious sources) and issue religious rulings, while at other times they attend to general or particular CUSTOMARY affairs. Given that they enjoy authority in issuing rulings, judgment, and governance, what they have taken on in these three areas could be studied with regards to their different states- using the ideas and teachings of Imam Khomeini. This paper is trying to answer the question that while implementing their authority, on what occasions Faqihs utilize their juridical state and when they use their CUSTOMARY state. With a descriptive and analytic approach, this fundamental study comes to the conclusion that today Faqihs are often using their CUSTOMARY state in judgment and governance, whether limited - such as orphans' custody - or general - such as leadership and administration of the society - and only on rare occasions they may come to use their juridical state.

Background and Aim: The international law of the seas is based on the strong shoulders of the powerful system of international custom that has been repeatedly cited by international judicial and arbitration authorities. Therefore, in a comprehensive study, it was necessary to study the CUSTOMARY rules of delimitation of maritime areas, which have undergone many changes and transformations over the centuries. The present article examines this trend with a brief look at the CUSTOMARY rules of delimitation of maritime areas. Materials and Methods: The research method in this paper is descriptive-analytical. Ethical Considerations: Ethical considerations regarding the writing of texts as well as references to sources were observed. Findings: CUSTOMARY international law has played an important role in the process of forming the international law of the seas and shaping the necessary criteria to evaluate its rules. The PRINCIPLE of the commonality of the seas, the national authority over the seas, the PRINCIPLE of the freedom of the seas in the Middle Ages, the judgment of the maritime courts and the legal opinions of the maritime dispute resolution authorities are evidence of the CUSTOMARY rules governing the seas. If the CUSTOMARY rules are so effective in the formation of the rules of delimitation of maritime areas that need special attention, then the course of its evolution was examined and the impact of CUSTOMARY rules on the development of the law of the sea was examined. Conclusion: This article emphasizes that CUSTOMARY law has not provided a specific method for delimitation that is legally binding or creates a privileged position over other methods.

In civil law and Imamiyah jurisprudence, based on the theory of narration and basis of the contract of guarantee on the institution of Dhimmah, the subject of this contract is limited to the fixed religion in Dhimmah and existing at the time of the contract, to the extent that most of the jurists have considered the absence of these two aforementioned conditions as the cause of the invalidity of this contract. However, the subject of guaranteed and common contracts cannot be limited to these conditions. The adequacy of the existence of the cause is not enough to solve the issue. Therefore, it is necessary to correctly identify the subject of the contract, the conditions, and its effects on these conditions, based on the nature of this type of guarantee and appropriate techniques related to this nature, in the guarantees that are used in society. The current paper, in addition to proposing a general theory in the realm of guarantee, it has broken the monopoly of the subject on religion and made obligations in its broadest sense the subject of this contract, with a descriptive-analytical method and focusing on the CUSTOMARY approach to the guarantee contract, by analyzing the nature of the CUSTOMARY guarantee and its profound difference with the narrative guarantee, and using the responsible institution instead of the institution of dhimmah in explaining the subject of the contract.

Background and Aim: The safety commitment of the physician and the hospital against the patient has been accepted in such a way that various laws, regulations and instrucions has been set it in first field, but the source of safety commitment in this type of contract are not limited to the rules of the subject and custom and CUSTOMARY rules independed of other factors and as one of the of first sources of contract law will cause the formation of asatety obligation in the contracts concluded between the doctor and patient in such a way that the violation of this abligation causes civil liability. Method: This article has been written descriptivety-analyticaly using library resources. Ethical Considerations: This research has been done be observing ethical PRINCIPLEs and trustworthiness in using the available sources. Results: The court hearing the violation of the doctor's safety obligation against patient conissue verdicts to compensate the patient with documents based on CUSTOMARY rules in the light of some articles of civil code, such as articles 220 and 365. Conclusion: One of the accepted obligations in the contrcted relationship is the safey oblisation with the proviso that in the execution of the contract, it must be done in a way that does not harm the life or property of the contracting party, other wise the breach of the cortract will occur and civil liability will arise. Creating a safety obligation in medical contracts sources such a law, contract provisions and custom are introduced. Among these, custom is very important because in medical contracts, the parties generally don't pay attention to the safety obligation and don't provide a solution custom as the only source while creating a safety obligation in this type of concract, will require the physician and hospital to violate the obligation to compensate the patient. Such a article 356 and 220 in civil law that will be explained during the discussion.

The word "CUSTOMARY Knowledge" is used to show a degree of preferred belief in which one should have complete trust and great belief to an object while he/she does not reach to absolute certainty (yaqiin) -in logic and philosophic sense. In this stage of belief we may reasonably confront with a contrary contingency but the wise people do not rely in this contingency and set it aside. They treat and recognize the CUSTOMARY knowledge as knowledge in logic sense and invoke to it in all aspects of their life In inferring shariah rules, Islamic jurists usually and generally seek for logic knowledge and specific conjecture (zann e khaas) as the means of inferring the rules. However, they believe that in the process of inferring Islamic rules they can invoke to CUSTOMARY knowledge. Islamic legislature (divine shaare) do not deny the way of the wise people in reliance on CUSTOMARY knowledge and permits to infer shariah rules on the base of this means of inferring.