Dominence of ethics in the family is a fundamental principle which constitutes the most pivotal issue of the family institution. Serving the wife or mother has no other motive than love and sacrifice and talking about the wages concerning these moral obligations is unfair; but if we want to discuss it from a legal point of view we will be faced with questions that this study attempts to answer. The basic questions in this article are: what is the jurisprudential and legal principle of demand for remuneration during the days of wedlock? What are the existing ambiguities and indifferations in the laws and regulations of Iran in relation to the accrued terms of remuneration? In remuneration there are ambiguities that are raised such as: What duties is the wife legally responsible for? What is the original principle concerning the intention of donation or giving property? How does the violation of the duties of taking care of the spouse that prevent the demand of an allowance mean? The findings of the present research show that the jurisprudential principle of remuneration during the days of wedlock, is a matter of respect for property and action of a muslim. Also Article 336 of the Civil Code and its clause, paragraph A of Clause 6 of the modified version of devorce regulation (adopted in 1371) and Article 29 of the Family Protection Act (enacted in 1391) are the legal principle of the financial institution. Also the majority of jurists consider the wife to be obliged to fullfil certain duties. About the wife’s duties in the home, we cannot refer to the legal norm of giving property without concideration because we might face some other problem.

The importance of confession in evidence in substantiation of claims and rights is clear for everyone and by reason of religious law of confession, the sane is well aware of his loss and confessor is bound to his confession contents. There is no dispute between jurists and lawyers about confession influence of healthy person but about sick person confession (in death sickness) and there are different opinions among scholars of five Islamic law schools of jurisprudence.This article studies the opinions of the five Islamic schools of jurisprudence by using reasonable and narrative evidence.

In all contracts, the first principle is based on necessity, but use of this principle by common excuse can be abolished. The common excuse against the special excuse is a barrier out of parties will which generally prohibits the obligation of contract or in some cases like lease contract it can hamper the VINDICATION of benefits. The prohibition of the VINDICATION of benefits by common excuse depending on the time of appearance would had been effected because common excuse can be appear in various times, because the common excuse can be happened sometimes before bill of subject of hire and sometimes immediately after that and sometimes with an interval after bill maybe before any exploitation of benefits or during the exploitation or at the end of the that. This research has investigated these aspects especially related to lease contract.

Childbearing and its related aspects is one of the issues that is of significance in the current Iranian society and one of the factor which influences it is marriage. In addition, through the changes occurred in families and its relative collapse in western countries, the way of considering the issue of childbearing, while not losing its value and importance, has been highly different. The present study, through a descriptive-analytic approach, has attempted to answer the main question that what is the position of a variable such as marriage in VINDICATION of the reproductive right of human in Islamic, UK and US legal systems? The results of this research demonstrate that in Islamic law, marriage is an important factor in vindicating the human reproductive right, so the singles cannot do so without it and even after the dissolution of marriage due to various causes like death, divorce, termination, apostasy etc., this VINDICATION is limited and only in certain situations is permissible. However, in British law it is subject to the written permission of the husband and in US law, after the death of the husband, the wife can use his sperm for childbearing unlimitedly and give birth to a child in this way. The significance of this matter is illustrated when the rights of babies and children is the case. From the Islamic point of view, parentage as a basic and essential right can guarantee the other rights of the child, and if this right cannot be proven, then it would not be easy to talk about other rights of the child.

Although the subject-matter of cargo and ship mortgage are similar (providing financial security for creditors), the regulations of these contracts, differ from each other essentially with regard to the conditionality of taking possession in concluding the contract, the possibility of endorsement and cession in mortgage document, the creditor s kind of real right , the preference of prior or latter creditor in VINDICATION of right and the effect of mortgage loss on the contract and the possibility of recovery of claim. Moreover the cargo mortgage regulations are, in some regards and aspects, contrary to general legal rules and hence subject to criticism.

Dowry is one of the financial effects of marriage contract, whose limit has not been clearly determined in the Holy Quran and Islamic narrations although in narrations and hadiths, the dowry has been recommended and emphasized to be specified in low amounts. In the Civil Code of Iran, determining the amount of dowry is dependent on the couple’ s mutual consent. Inspired by the rules of bilateral contracts in the Islamic jurisprudence and according to Article 1085 of the Civil Code, the right of lien has been specified for the VINDICATION of the wife’ s dowry. Accordingly, if the dowry is payable on demand and the husband avoids paying the dowry, the wife can refuse to perform marital duties and require the man to pay it. Based on the aforesaid article indicating the cancellation or continuance of the mentioned right, if it is determined that the husband is in hardship, the dowry is paid in installments based on the court order. In this respect, there are different views on the part of courts. Ultimately, this difference of opinions led to the issuance of the judicial procedure unity vote No. 708 dated 8/12/2008 of the General Board of the Supreme Court. This study which was conducted through a descriptive-correlational method and library tool aims to investigate the jurisprudential and legal foundations of the mentioned vote. Contrary to critics’ viewpoints, _ it seems that the issued vote which is according to the opinions of some contemporary jurisprudents and is backed by legal standards_ can play an effective role in reducing large dowries and promoting family stability in today’ s society. On the other hand, this legal provision is a clear guarantee for the VINDICATION of the wife’ s rights. Further, practical suggestions have been provided in this regard and in line with the critical job of legislation.

Torkkharazmshahiyan establishment in kharazm & in the Eeast of Islamic world indicates that this family coordinated themselves with government conventions, government institutions & administrative system by the native personels, that is Iranian workers & tribunalism. Since this government needed efficient government institutions to improve therir aims, “kharazmi” kings especially Etszvetgesh established new institutions and the ehanges in the respected arena in addition to retaining tribunalism system that derived from samaniyan official arganization. Kharazmshihiyan government organization was based on two principle: “Palace” and “government”. “palce” was just kharazmi king court that “vakildar”, “Tashtdar” “hajeb” and was of its components. “Government” that forms kharazmshahiyanofficcal system and the minister serviced in its peak as the connection ring of the king and other governments shus as “dictations”, “VINDICATION”, “dignity”, “repution”. In this text we intend to survey the government system & kharazmigovernment official organization.

The technical term of acceptance and refusal in the case of patrimonium (the estate of deceased); which has been used in inheritance procedure act; does not mean; automatically; the acceptance and refusal of inheritance; because it is occurred by the law and; inheritance; acceptance and refusal of the estate deceased has no role in its occurrence. However; the existence of the principle of acceptance and refusal in that case shall affect in legal relation between legator and heirs; his/her creditors of legator. Acceptance and refusal is not realized without intention of heirs; because they are intentional acts. Since; the acceptance and refusal in that case means acceptance or refusal of capacity of estate-executor; due to the having authority; capacity in VINDICATION of rights and free intention; therefore acceptance and refusal of person under duress is not valid.

There are different views in discussing the necessity or the lack of necessity of the transactions without contraction. One of the reasons referred to by those who believe in the lack of necessity of the transactions without contraction is the famous narration “truly, the word makes something lawful or unlawful”. There are disagreements among jurists as to whether the “word” has been used in its superficial meaning or it has a metaphoric meaning. There are various possibilities according to the reasons in this regard by analyzing of which it turned out that none of them are acceptable; rather, by the “word” it is probably meant the corresponding meaning: that is, a conversation carried out between the dealer and the customer, which has the capability of being both the rules of VINDICATION and sanctity without being involved in the problems of other possibilities and it will not lead to any conflict with the validity of the transaction without contraction.