One of the main issues in the field of ‘conflict of laws in cross-border insolvency’ is the Recognition and enforcement of Foreign Judgment. After issuing a Foreign Judgment in the field of insolvency proceedings and liquidating or reorganizing the bankrupt's property, the liquidator will demand its execution at the involved states (the place of location of debtor' s assets). It depends on the state's policies about Recognition and enforcement of the insolvency proceedings whether to accept the demand or to reject it.The state’s policy in this regard is different due to its mutual connection with the public policy. Some states have generally rejected this request, and others are provided to deal with it. In this paper, the legislative policy of EU Regulation in Insolvency Proceedings (2000) and UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (1997) and the Iranian law on Recognition and enforcement of Foreign insolvency Judgment will be analyzed.

Involvement of people’s volition in the scope of women’s right is one of the challenging subjects in this scope. The possibility of transferring or dispossessing of this right is a discussion which has a long history. The following question can be asked in any right that exists in women’s right scope: is it possible to dispossess the right or transferring or rendering its possession and involvement of “permission” and “declared volition” in its “constriction and expansion“ and “dispossession”? The answer of the above question, ultimately relates to right or obligation of the one who is in the right. Although, expressional right has the capability of transmission and dispossession and the declarative and written volition of the person in personal privacy has a crucial role in preservation and dispossession of the right and also its constriction and expansion. While the Judgment (obligation) is unsusceptible of being invaded by people’s volition in transferring and dispossession and substantially is concentrated on its advantages, disadvantages and issues. So, the Judgment can’t be dispossessed but by negation of the issue. The methodology of Recognition of right from Judgment in the scope of women right is requisite attention which is contemplated in this paper. Paying attention to commonalities, Judgment and subject relations, written informative predicates, existing public goods and the right of the God are some of the scales which are discussed to catch the purpose of the study.

In contrast to private international law, a country's criminal authorities including court and the Public institution prosecution only apply their own country's criminal laws in the realm of international criminal law. However, it would not mean that all international criminal laws and sentences are discredited. Sometimes, domestic criminal laws require the courts to consider international criminal laws and sentences as well. For example, over a trial in a country, they may avoid retrial the crime committed by their nationals in overseas if the committed act is a crime in that country as well. This is very important during the preliminary investigation Process. In this Process, Foreign criminal law or sentence is valid from two aspects: one is before making the final decision, and the other one is the process of making the final decision in the form of final appointments of the court. At every Process, there are some effects on each of the mentioned measures, about which there are different opinions.

Abstract:The interference of the interests of private individuals and the sovereignty of states in the field of international relations has led to the Recognition of Foreign court Judgments relying on various doctrines on international relations, such as comity and reciprocity. The application of these doctrines makes the rights of private individuals dependent on the conduct and interaction of conflicting governments. Alternative theories have also failed to provide an accurate and unambiguous criterion for Recognition of Foreign Judgments and persuading governments to amend their regulations. Conclusion of international treaties, albeit regional and bilateral, as the superior way to Recognition of Foreign Judgments is the only way to establish legal stability, avoid double litigation, and prevent the issuance of conflicting Judgments in today's divided world. In a world with a high level of cross-border communication, it is necessary that the Judgments of the courts can be cross-border. But achieving this goal is possible only with the cooperation of governments, flexibility to Foreign Judgments and acceptance of commitment within certain frameworks.

If an agreement of the choice of court or choice of forum clause in international private law has legal effect, it may grant exclusive jurisdiction to the chosen court, and disqualified from the courts of other countries, unless agreed to be the chosen court is non-exclusive. Judgment of chosen court in another country shall be recognized or enforced if such agreement is valid under the law of the court that hearing the request of Recognition and enforcement of Foreign Judgment. The method of this article is analytical-descriptive and its result shows that such an agreement is generally neither contrary to public judicial policy nor contrary to the rules of internal civil procedure in determining the jurisdiction of courts, unless the agreement is not valid in terms of law (unlawful), such as the choice of court agreement is the case in the exclusive jurisdiction of another courts of country. Also if this agreement has been concluded by fraud or fraudulently or unfairly is not valid. Plus, if the chosen court of the two parties is not related to the elements of the dispute, the court can, due to the lack of a reasonable and legitimate interest and to avoid imposing court costs on its respective country, does not consider such jurisdiction valid and refuses to hear the case; But if the Judgment is issued, Recognition and enforcement it in abroad, it depends on the court's opinion of the legitimacy of this type of agreement.

Recognition and enforcement of annulled Foreign arbitral awards has always been one of the most controversial issues in arbitration law in which courts and arbitral experts have expressed different views in this regard. According to the article 5 (1) (e) of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (Iran is a party), annulling the award by a competent authority prevents its Recognition and enforcement. However, according to some views, the Foreign arbitral award shall be recognized and enforced although it is annulled. Nevertheless, the arbitral experts opinions show the possibility of Recognition and enforcement of annulled Foreign arbitral awards in two cases that are examined in this article: (first) in special cases, by applying the "residual discretionary power" under the top of article 5 (1) of the convention; and (second) if there are more favorable law and by applying "More favorable-right provision" under article 7 (1) of the convention.

Nature has aesthetics of its own, what can provoke the human mind into better recognizing the concept of beauty via mental perception. As such, human mind can interact with the nonverbal expressions of nature only to better his/her primitive aesthetic knowledge and reach a more novel Recognition of aestheticism via the practice of interpretative deduction. This article has been the result of a series of discussions and dialogues between the authors on the nature of aesthetic geotouring and exploring the natural phenomena based on the Dialectical Method of Socrates and modelled after the Platonic dialogues. The outcome of this dialectic study brings to light the fact that touring in nature through providing the due opportunity for mental perception of aesthetic phenomena can provide a clearer definition of ‘beauty’ in its rich variety. Aesthetic search as such will culminate in forming a more illuminated mental concept of beauty in mind, what can influence human rationale for aesthetic Judgment and enrich even more the texture of human aesthetic creation. Such aesthetico-interpretative endeavor might lead to a higher potential for creating more original works of literature and art and culminate in a better Judgment about such aesthetic creations.

With the removal of the theoretical shortage of the rational main stream theories such as realism that emphasize on material and power benefits, constructivism appears from the beginning of the 1990s. The Constructivism known as a new perspective in international relations and Foreign policy. This approach contains important axioms such as importance of rational and normative structures beside material structures, importance of international and internal norms that form identity of states.Considering to this point, with the victory of Ahmadinejad in the ninth election's presidency, he emphasis on the justice and his government named Osoulgara (fundationalits). Thus, the ninth government of the Republic Islamic of Iran paid attention to the principles such as return to the primary ideals of the Islamic revolution, aid to the revolutionary movements and notice to justice. In this regard, the question is that whether we can use of constructivism to analysis the Foreign policy of the ninth government of the Republic Islamic of Iran or not?In the other words, can constructivism be suitable instrument for analysis of this period of the Foreign policy of Republic Islamic of Iran? The hypothesis is that in attention to the theoretical factors of constructivism; this approach can be suitable theory for analysis the Foreign policy of Islamic Republic of Iran in that period.

The aim of this study is to examine whether and when the non-financial information disclosure method affects the financial Judgment of the firm 's financial performance? " For this purpose, the influence of the two independent variables discussed causal links and the level of non-financial performance on firm financial performance ( income, income growth, net income and net income growth are represented as the representative of the company " s financial performance criteria ) as the dependent variable. this research is based on the method of research, deductive and inductive and the type of research is applied. also, in terms of deduction method, descriptive-analytic and in terms of the research project is survey. survey tool is questionnaire. the population of this study is study students at the university level of one country. statistical methods to test hypothesis, test ratio, single-sample t test, independent t test, one-way variance analysis is one-way and two-way variance. the findings show that the disclosure of non-financial information along with causal relationships affects investors Judgments about future financial performance of the company. however, the influence of investors Judgment by providing non-financial information in the long term can be interpreted.

Abstract: A Judgment issued by a Foreign country has been recognized and enforced if originating court has jurisdiction for hear the matter. This jurisdiction has been evaluated on the base of rules of addressed country. The key question is what are the criteria for accepting the jurisdiction of a Foreign court at the voting stage? Some countries have jurisdiction over a Foreign court, such as a domestic court. Others, by limiting the scope of jurisdiction of a Foreign court, accept the jurisdiction of a Foreign court only on the basis of strict criteria.. In Iranian law, only the exclusive jurisdiction of the Iranian court is considered as an impediment for Recognition of Foreign Judgments. The need to meet the legitimate expectations of private individuals and to provide predictability in cross-border relations requires that the jurisdiction of a Foreign court be defined as in the 2019 Hague Convention and that litigants be assured of the condition of Recognition in other countries before the trial begins. The lack of uniform jurisdiction rules among countries to recognize Foreign court Judgments undermines the efficiency and usefulness of international litigation and makes it impossible for free movement of Judgments between countries. The need to meet the legitimate expectations of private individuals and to create predictability in cross-border relations requires that cases of jurisdiction of a Foreign court be specified and that litigants ensure that this condition is met in other countries before a trial can begin.