درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Purpose: The present paper aims to find the exact responsibility of maritime carriers under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act. In this regard, the delicacy of the US legislature has always been considered by other legal systems. Also, the attitude of the Rotterdam Rules towards new issues, such as the entry of electronic shipping documents and the hybrid carriage into the industry, has created new dimensions in relation to the responsibility of carriers, which justifies such study. Methodology: The research methodology will be analytical-descriptive. In this method, the existing references on the subject are investigated to comparatively identify and describe the rights and duties of the maritime carrier. Then, based on rational-legal rules, the subject is analyzed to show the ambiguities and the real status of the subject. Findings: in considerations done, there are many important conventions like HARTER act, Hague on 1924, Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1936, the HAMBURG regulations on 1978 and ROTTERDAM on 2009, that have mentioned the marine transportation responsibility and these laws and regulations, behave with the factor of damages, based on the case and based on the responsibility and fault assumption related to the transportation responsible. Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, has been trying to compensate The Hague convention deficiencies meanwhile referring some cases to the sub-regulations and using some ways and approaches and the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, has set some limitations for the responsibilities that sometimes the carriers put them for themselves and for example, each carrier, cannot decrease its responsibility to less than 50 American dollars, that is confirmed for each parcel in the law. Conclusion: the ROTTERDAM regulations, has started considering the dispensation of marine transportation responsible and meantime, has canceled the duty and fault dispensation in navigation and ship handling. And the ROTTERDAM convention, has opened new horizons in marine transportation by using door-to-door way to carry goods and prevail electronic documents and also, setting the volumetric contracts.

Introduction: The main purpose of this research is investigating the attitude of educational managers toward Pluralistic Curriculum. Methodology: To achieve this goal, the research method combined with the exploratory approach is used. The research method was the grand theory in the qualitative section, and survey in the quantitative part. Based on purposeful sampling, 30 school principals who were expert in this area, selected and were interviewed using the in-depth interview method. The interview continued until the theoretical saturation point. In the quantitative part, according to the results obtained from the previous studies the target group interviews, a questionnaire prepared by the researcher and used. In the qualitative section, the acquisition of credibility, through believability, transferability and verifiability were achieved. In the coding processes to increase the trust two encoders were used. Three types of open, axial and selective coding were used in the method of data analysis in the qualitative section. The factor analysis and Friedman test were also used in the quantitative part. Findings: The result of the research revealed that from the viewpoint of educational managers, the pluralistic curriculum has five components, including racial and ethnic inequality, linguistic diversity, gender inequality, social inequality, and religious diversity. Conclusion: The dimensions of the pluralistic curriculum in comparison with the existing situation that, consisting of two components including racial and ethnic inequality and gender inequality, has five components, including racial and ethnic inequality, linguistic plurality, gender inequality, social inequality, and the Religious diversity.