Prescription in Iranian Law, A dilemma about substantive or procedural concept
آرشیو
چکیده
The concept of prescription, or limitation of time for initiating legal proceedings, was first addressed The Statute of Limitations for Movable Properties, approved on July 2, 1929 It was later articulated in a more general language in Iran’s 1939 Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). Article 731 defined prescription as a period after which courts would no longer hear claims, while Article 737 established a ten-year limitation for property-related and debt claims, unless otherwise provided by specific laws. This legal framework remained valid until 1983, when the Guardian Council—responsible for ensuring the compatibility of legislation with Islamic jurisprudence—declared the provisions on prescription contrary to Islamic law and therefore null and void. Consequently, Iranian courts ceased to recognize prescription as a defense, and the new CCP enacted in 2000 omitted any reference to it. Despite the general invalidation of prescription under civil law, certain specific provisions in other legal codes—such as the Commercial Code, the Insurance Code, and the Islamic Criminal Code—have remained operative. Furthermore, in 1992 and 2008, the Guardian Council clarified that its 1983 decision did not apply to claims brought by foreign nationals against Iranian citizens if the claimant’s national legal system recognized prescription. In such cases.Prescription in Iranian Law
The concept of prescription, or limitation of time for initiating legal proceedings, was first addressed The Statute of Limitations for Movable Properties, approved on July 2, 1929 It was later articulated in a more general language in Iran’s 1939 Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). Article 731 defined prescription as a period after which courts would no longer hear claims, while Article 737 established a ten-year limitation for property-related and debt claims, unless otherwise provided by specific laws. This legal framework remained valid until 1983, when the Guardian Council—responsible for ensuring the compatibility of legislation with Islamic jurisprudence—declared the provisions on prescription contrary to Islamic law and therefore null and void. Consequently, Iranian courts ceased to recognize prescription as a defense, and the new CCP enacted in 2000 omitted any reference to it. Despite the general invalidation of prescription under civil law, certain specific provisions in other legal codes—such as the Commercial Code, the Insurance Code, and the Islamic Criminal Code—have remained operative. Furthermore, in 1992 and 2008, the Guardian Council clarified that its 1983 decision did not apply to claims brought by foreign nationals against Iranian citizens if the claimant’s national legal system recognized prescription. In such cases.
تبلیغات
