امتناع از رسیدگی به جهت رد دادرس با نگاهی تطبیقی در حقوق فرانسه

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسنده

دانشیار گروه حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

هنگامی که کسی حق دادخواهی خود را اعمال میکند و رسیدگی آغاز میشود، هر گونه وقفه و مانعیت در این کار تا مرز واکنش استنکاف از احقاق حق، بازخورد دارد و ممنوع است. با وجود این، جهات رد دادرس که ریشه در دو اصل بیطرفی دادرس و استقلال دادگاه دارد، به نوعی در فرایند رسیدگی مانعیتی پدید میآورد که اجرای نادرست آن میتواند حق دادخواهی را با ارسال بیمورد پرونده به دادرسان و دادگاه های دیگر متاثر نماید یا این که متداعیین را نسبت به دادرسی که خود را مردود نمیداند دل چرکین کند. این جهات که در قانون شمارشان محصور شده، اگر به رعایت اصول مرقوم اجرا شوند، نوعی تعادل و توازن در اجرای اصول به وجود خواهد آمد که نه مخل دادخواهی است و نه بی اعتباری دادرسی و رای. با این وصف، نگنجیدن یک جهت در قالب ایراد رد دادرس، مانع طرح آن به شکل دفاع در فرایند طرق شکایت برای نقض رای نیست که دیدگاهی نو در این مقاله است. همچنین، شش رای وحدت رویه دیوان عالی کشور که درباره شناخت مصادیق رد و اثر قرار امتناع از رسیدگی صادر شده، گرچه توانسته تا حد زیادی ابهامات قوانین را مرتفع کند ولی، به همة پرسش های پیرامون این جهات و آن قرار پاسخ نمیدهد و کاستی ها باقی است. برخی رای های وحدت رویه در عین اهمیت، درباره اجرای اصول بیطرفی و استقلال، راهکاری ندارند و برخی دیگر، متاثر از سوء استفاده از ایراد رد دادرس صادر شدهاند حال آنکه مطالعات تطبیقی میتواند رهیافت های سودمندی برای اصلاح قوانین و مقررات و نگرشها به دست دهد. در این مقاله کوشش شده، تا حدی از آوردة حقوق تطبیقی برای کاربست بهتر قوانین آیین دادرسی بهره برده شود..

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Refusal to Adjudication due to the Judge's Recuse Comparative Study in French Law

نویسنده [English]

  • Hassan Mohseni
Associate Professor, Department of Private and Islamic Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

When someone exercises his right of action and the proceedings begin, any interruption and obstruction in this work has a negative effect and is prohibited. Despite this, the reasons for recuse the judge, which is rooted in the two principles of the impartiality of the judge and the independence of the court, in some way create an obstacle in the process of proceedings, so the incorrect implementation of that can affect the right to action by sending the case to other judges or courts in which the litigants to be felt upset about the proceedings that he does not consider himself recused. These recuse causes, which are contained in the law, if they are implemented in accordance with that principles, there will be a kind of balance in the implementation of the principles, which will not interfere with litigation, nor invalidate the proceedings and the judgment. With this definition, not including a direction in the form of recuse to the judge does not prevent it from being presented as a defense in the process of complaining about the reviewing of the decision, which is a new point of view in this article. Also, the six unification decisions of the Supreme Court, which have been issued regarding the clarification of hard cases of recuse and the effect of refusal to adjudication, although it has been able to solve the ambiguities of the laws to a large extent, it does not answer all the questions surrounding these aspects and shortcomings remain. Some unification decisions of the Supreme Court, while important, do not have a solution regarding the implementation of the principles of neutrality and independence, and others have been issued due to the misuse of the judge's recuse, while comparative studies can provide useful approaches to reform laws and regulations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Causes of Recuse the judge
  • Refusal to adjudication
  • Independence of the court
  • impartiality of the judge
  • Guarantees
Abhari, Hamid, (2013), Civil Procedure Code (3), Babolsar, Mazandaran. [In Persian]
Amrani-Mekki et Yves Strickler, (2014), Proédure civile, Paris, Puf.
Beheshti, Mohammad Javad and Nader Mardani, (2015), Civil Procedure, Tehran, Mizan, Volume 2. [In Persian]
Blomeyer, Ared, (1982), Civil Procedure, Chapter 4: Types of Relief Available (Judical Remedies), The Hague, London, Boston.
Boroujerdi Abdeh, Mohammad, (2012), Judicial-Legal principles extracted from the Rulings of the Supreme Court of the country, Part II, Tehran, Raham. [In Persian]
Cadiet, Loïc et Emmanuel Jeuland, (2020), Droit judiciaire privé, Paris, Litec.
Fricero, Natalie, Récusation et abstention des juges: analyse comparative de l'exigence commune d'impartialité, NOUVEAUX CAHIERS DU CONSEIL CONSTITUTIONNEL N° 40 (DOSSIER: LE CONSEIL CONSTITUTIONNEL: TROIS ANS DE QPC) - JUIN 2013, pp. 1-26.
Friedenthal, Jack H., Arthur R. Miller, John E. Sexton & Helen Hershkoff, (2013), Civil Procedure, Cases and Materials, USA: West, 11th Edition.
Frison-Roche, Marie-Anne, 1999, L’impartialité du juge, Recuil Dalloz, 6° Chaier Chronique, pp. 53-57.
Ghamami, Majid and Hassan Mohseni, (2016), Transnational Civil Procedure, Tehran, Enteshar Co., fifth edition. [In Persian]
Goyet, Charles, (2001), Remarques sur l'impartialité du tribunal, Recueil Dalloz, p. 328.
Iftikhar Jahormi, Goudarz and Mostafa Elsan, (2019). Civil Procedure, Tehran, Mizan, Volume 3. [In Persian]
Joneidi, Laiya, (1378), Comparative Review of International Commercial Arbitration Law, with foreword by Dr. Seyed Hossein Safaei, Tehran, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences. [In Persian]
Kakavand, Mohammad, (2019), Recuse of Arbitrators of the Iran-United States Claims Arbitration Court, Tehran, Shahrdanesh, third edition. [In Persian]
Karimi, Abbas, (2008), Civil Procedure, Tehran, Majd. [In Persian]
Karimzadeh, Ahmad, (2008), Disciplinary supervision in the judicial system, Tehran, the official newspaper of the country, volume 3. [In Persian]
Karimzadeh, Ahmad, (2008), Supreme Disciplinary Court Judges' Opinions in Criminal Matters, Second Collection, Tehran Mizan. [In Persian]
Karimzadeh, Ahmed, (1378), Disciplinary supervision in the judicial system, Tehran, official newspaper, volume 2. [In Persian]
Malektbar Firouzjaei, Hadi, (2018), General Rules of Procedural Plea, Tehran, Enteshar Co. [In Persian]
Mateen, Ahmad, (2011), Judicial procedure collection, criminal part, Tehran, Raham. [In Persian]
Mateen, Ahmad, (2013), Judicial Procedure Collection, civil part, Tehran, Hashemi. [In Persian]
Matin Daftari, Ahmad, (1378), Civil and Commercial Procedures, Tehran, Majd, Volume 2. [In Persian]
Mohseni, Dr. Hassan, (2015), Transferring jurisdiction of the court with an order to refuse the trial (in the light of the unification decision No. 735 of the Supreme Court), in: A selection of legal thoughts dedicated to Professor Mr. Dr. Hassan Ali Dorodian), by Laia Junidi and Alireza Masoudi, Tehran, Athakh Publishing Company, p. 443-471. [In Persian]
Mohseni, Hassan, (1401), French civil procedure code, Tehran, Enteshar Co. [In Persian]
Mohseni, Hassan, (2019), Organizing The Civil Procedure, According to the Cooperation Theory & in Framework of Principles of Procedure, Tehran, Enteshar Co. [In Persian]
Mohseni, Hassan, (2019), Interest in Litigation (Iranian & French Legal Doctrine and Case Law), Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, 10.22099/JLS.2019.5240, P. 237-266. [In Persian]
Mohseni, Hassan, Mohammad Valai, and Nilofar Taheri Leskoklaye, (1401), The Problem of a Previous Opinion Expressed in a Case of Disqualification of a Judge; Confirmation of the validity of an auction: Procedural or Substantive Opinion (A Critique and Review of Judgment No. 140006290000446311, September 14, 2021 Made by Branch 14 of the Supreme Court), Analysis of Judicial Decisions Journal, No. 1, No. 1, 10.22034/ANALYSIS.2022.253297, p. 160-174. [In Persian]
Nahreini, Fereydoun, (2018), Civil Procedure, lawsuits, conditions for filing and hearing it, Tehran, Ganj Danesh, volume 2. [In Persian]
Nobakht, Youssef, (2015), Judicial Thoughts, Tehran, Book Tek. [In Persian]
Sadrzadeh Afshar, Dr. Seyed Mohsen, (2015), Civil and Commercial Procedures, Allameh Tabatabai Academic Jihad, Ninth edition. [In Persian]
Shahidi, Moussa, (1340), "legal-criminal-administrative-lawyers affairs" judicial standards of the Supreme Disciplinary Court in terms of administrative violations, Tehran, Scientific. [In Persian]
Shams, Dr. Abdullah, (2008). Civil Procedure, Tehran, Darak, 20th edition, volume 2. [In Persian]
Unification Judgments of the General Board of the Supreme Court (from 1323 to 1400), (1401), Tehran, Office of Unification Judgments of the Supreme Court. [In Persian]
Yousefzadeh, Morteza, (2011), Civil Procedure, Tehran, Enteshar Co. [In Persian]
دوره 8، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 13
در حال صفحه آرایی و بارگزاری فایل اصل مقالات
فروردین 1403
  • تاریخ دریافت: 31 فروردین 1402
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 29 خرداد 1402
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 31 تیر 1402