اصل انصاف؛ ماهیت، انواع و کارکردهای آن

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشکدة علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، واحد زنجان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، زنجان، ایران

2 استادیار گروه حقوق، دانشکدة علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی، قزوین، ایران

چکیده

انصاف در قلمرو حقوق، که توسط قاضی یا داور در حل‌وفصل اختلافات در نظر گرفته می‌شود، به طور کلی، بر یکی از دو مفهوم «اصل انصاف» یا «اصول عدل و انصاف» اشاره دارد. انصاف در مفهوم نخست، که یکی از اصول کلی حقوقی است، خود شامل سه نوع با کارکردهای متفاوت است که هر سه جزئی از هنجار قانونی است و در مقام تصمیم‌گیری بخشی از حقوق تلقی می‌شود و توسل به آن‌ها نیازمند رضایت طرفین اختلاف نیست. حسب نوع نقص موجود در هنجارها، انصاف در چارچوب حقوق، با ارائة تفسیری مطابق واقعیت‌های موجود، دارای کارکرد تعدیلی است؛ انصاف فراحقوق، با پر کردن خلأهای حقوقی به هنگام مواجه با سکوت قواعد حقوقی، دارای کارکرد تکمیلی است و انصاف مغایر با حقوق، با کنار گذاشتن قانون حاکم به هنگام تضاد بین قوانین، نقش جایگزینی قواعد حقوقی را ایفا می‌کند. با وجود نقش مهم اصل انصاف در حل‌وفصل اختلافات و توسل به انواع آن در مراجع بین‌المللی، این اصل در حقوق‌های داخلی مورد توجه و اهتمام لازم قرار نگرفته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Equity; Nature, Types and Functions

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ensieh Motiei 1
  • Masoud Alborzi Verki 2
1 Ph.D. of Private Law, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
چکیده [English]

Fairness in the sphere of law, which is used, by a judge or an arbitrator, in resolving disputes, in general, refers to one of two concepts of "equity" or "ex aequo et bono". The first concept is a general principle of law, itself consists of three types with different kinds of functions, all three of which are legal norms and, in deciding a case, is considered as part of law, recourse to them often does not require consent of parties to a dispute. Depending on the type of defect in the norms, infra legem by providing an interpretation in accordance with existing facts, the function of moderation, praeter legem which through the filling of legal gaps, has a supplementary function and contra legem by abandoning the governing law when conflicting rules, plays the replacement role of legal rules. Despite the important role of principles of law in the settlement of disputes and its application in international law, this principle has not been addressed in domestic law.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • General principle of law
  • Infra legem
  • Praeter legem
  • contra legem
  • Functions
افتخاری، رضا (1388). مقدمه‌ای بر حقوق بین‌الملل عمومی، مشهد، مرندیز.
امیدی، علی (1388). حقوق بین‌الملل، از نظریه تا عمل، تهران، میزان.
امینی، اعظم (1395). «بازاندیشی رابطة انصاف و حقوق»، پژوهش حقوق خصوصی، س 5، ش 16، صص 31 ـ 56.
سیف، روزبه (1386). «مقدمه‌ای بر جایگاه انصاف در داوری بین‌المللی»، وبلاگ داوری، http://dawari.blogfa.com، صص 1 ـ 17.
محبی، محسن (1383). دیوان داوری دعاوی ایران‌ـ ایالات متحدة امریکا، ماهیت ساختار عملکرد، تهران، فردافر.
محبی، محسن؛ اعظم امینی (1393). «اصل انصاف و ظرفیت قاعده‌سازی آن در رویة دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری»، مجلة حقوقی بین‌المللی، ش 51، صص 9 ـ 40.
معین، محمد (1381). فرهنگ فارسی متوسط، چ 19، تهران، امیرکبیر، ج 2.
موسی‌زاده، رضا (1376). حقوق بین‌الملل عمومی (1 ـ 2)، چ 2، تهران، وزارت امور خارجه، مرکز چاپ و انتشارات.
میرعباسی، سید باقر؛ رضوان باقرزاده (1389). «نقش انصاف در حل‌وفصل اختلافات بین‌المللی»، حقوق، مجلة دانشکدظ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، د 40، ش 2، صص 345 ـ 364.
References
Akehurst, M. (1976). “Equity and General Principles of Law”, ICLQ, Vol. 25, pp. 801-825.
Alain, P. (2012). The statute of the international court of justice: Commentary, Edited by Andreas Zimmermann, Karin Oellers-Frahm, Christian Tomuschat, and Christian J. Tams, Oxford, Oxford University press, 2nd Edition.
Amini, A. (2017). “Rethinking the Relationship of Fairness and Rights”, Journal of Private Law Research, Vol. 16, pp. 31-56. (in Persian)
Andenæs, M. & Chiussi, L. (2017). “GENERAL PRINCIPLES: COHESION AND EXPANSION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW”, Centre Universitaire de Norvège à Paris Fondation Maison des Sciences de l’Homme 190, Avenue de France, 75013 Paris, pp. 1-23.
Belohlavek, J. A. (2013). “Application of Law in Arbitration, Ex Aequo et Bono and Amiable Compositeur”, CYArb-Czech (& Central European) Yearbook of Arbitration: Borders of Procedural and Substantive Law in Arbitral Proceedings (Civil versus Common Law Perspectives), Vol. 3, pp. 25-52.
Bharti, S. (2016). “A CRITICAL STUDY ON POWER OF THE ICJ TO DECIDE A CASE EX AEQUO ET BONO UNDER ARTICLE 38 (2)”, SHIV SHAKTI International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Academic Research (SSIJMAR), Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 1-10.
Blaszczak, L. & Kolber, J. (2013). “General Principles of Law and Equity as a Basis for Decision-Making in Arbitration”, Comparative Law Review, Vol. 15, pp. 189-208.
Brown, B. F. (1967). “Jurisprudence”, By Ba Wortley. Manchester: Manchester University Press; New York: Oceana Publications, Inc, The American Journal of Jurisprudence, pp. 232-235.
Brownlie, I. (2008). Principles of Public International Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 7th Edition.
Burke, C. J. (2009). The Equitable Theory of Humanitarian Intervention, Amsterdam Law Forum, University Amsterdam, Vol. 12.
Chattopadhya, S. K. (1975). “Equity in internaional law: its Growth and development”, GA. J. INT'L & COMP. L.Q, pp. 381-407.
Duro Degan, V. (2010). “Justice and International Law in the delimitation of the marine space”, EQUITY AND INTERNATIONAL LAW IN MARITIME DELIMITATIONS, pp. 139-157.
Eftekhari, R. (2010). An Introduction to International Public Law, Mashhad, Marandiz Publishing, 1st Edition. (in Persian)
Falcon Y Tella, M. J. (2008). Equity and Law, Translated into English by Peter Muckley, Leiden, Boston, Martinus Nihoff, 1st Edition.
Francioni, F. (2013). “Equity in International Law”, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law [MPEPIL], Oxford Public International Law, pp. 1-14.
Handel, J. (1996). “Equity in the American Courts and in the World Court”, Indiana International & Comparative Law Review, Vol. 6, N. 3, pp. 637-677.
Herboczková, J. (2008). “Amiable Composition in the International Commercial Arbitration”, at: www.law.muni.cz, pp. 1-11.
Hudson, A. (2015). Equity and Trusts, London and New York, Routledge, 8th Edition.
ICJ Reports (1982). Continental Shelf (Tunisia v. Libian Arab Jamahiria), Judgment (A) and Sep.Op. Arechaga (B).
ICJ Reports (1985). Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. Malta).
Janis, M. (1983), “The ambiguity of equity in international law”, Brooklyn Journal of International Law, Vol. 9, N. 7, pp. 7-34.
Janis, M. (1984). “Equity in International Law”, in: Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Edited by Rudolf Bernhardt, North-Holland Amsterdam, New York, Oxford, Vol. 7, pp. 74-78.
Lapidoth, R. (1987). Equity in International Law, Proceedings of the ASIL, 81st Annual Meeting.
Lowe, V. (1989). “The role of equity in international law”, Australian Year Book of International Law, pp. 54-81.
Malcolm, N. Shaw QC (2008). International Law, Cambridge, University Press, 6th Edition.
Maniruzzaman, M. AFM (2003). “The Arbitrator's Prudence in Lex Mercatoria: Amiable Composition and Ex Aequo et Bono in Decision Making”, Mealey's International Arbitration Report, Vol. 182, pp. 1-12.
Mirabasi, S. B. & Bagherzadeh, R. (2011). “The Role of Fairness in Settling International Disputes”, Journal Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Vol. 2, pp. 345-364. (in Persian)
Miyoshi, M. (1993). Considerations of Equity in the Settlement of Territorial and Boundary Disputes, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1st Edition.
Moein, M. (2003). Medium Persian Culture, Tehran, Amir kabir Publishing, Vol. 2, 19 th Edition. (in Persian)
Mohebi, M. & Amini, A. (2015). “An Equity and its capacity to rule in the International Court of Justice”, Journal of International Law, Vol. 51, pp. 9-40. (in Persian)
Mohebi, M. (1999). The International Law Character of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1st Edition.
--------------.(2005). The International Law Character of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, Tehran, Fardafard Publishing, 1st Edition. (in Persian)
Mousa Zadeh, R. (1998). General International Law (1-2), Tehran, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Publishing Center, 2nd Edition. (in Persian)
Newman, R. A. (1965). “Place and Function of Pure Equity in the Structure of Law”, The. Hastings Law journal, V. 16, I. 3, A. 4, pp. 401-429.
Oleck, H. L. (1951). Historical Nature of Equity Jurisprudence, Fordham Law Review, Vol. 20, Iss.1.
Omidi, A. (2010). International law from theory to practice, Tehran, Mizan Publising, 1st Edition. (in Persian)
Oxford Advanced Learner,s Dictionary (2004). Wehmeier, S, New York, Oxford University Press, 6th Edition.
Rosenne, S. (2006). The Law and the Practice of the International Court (1920-2005), Vol. 1-3, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 4th Edition.
Schachter, O. (1982). International Law in Theory and Practice: General Course of Public International Law, Brill, Nijhoff, Leiden, Boston, Vol. 178.
Schwebel, S. (2015). “International Decision: The latest award from the IRAN-UNITED STATES claims tribunal: The line between appromation of damages and ruling Ex Aequo et Bono”, American Journal of International Law 109 A.J.L.L.
Seif, B. (2008). “Introduction to the Position of Fairness in International Arbitration”, http://dawari.blogfa.com, pp. 1-17. (in Persian).
Sheppard, S. (2009). “Equity and the law”, in: Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems, Oxford, United Kingdom, Eolss Publishers UNESCO.
Srivastava, D. (2014). “Article 38(1) of ICJ and sources of International Law”, http://lex-warrier.in/2014/09/article-381-icj-sources-international-law/.
Trakman, L. (2008). “Ex Aequo et Bono: Demystifying an Ancient Concept”, Chicago Journal of International Law, Vol. 8, N. 2, pp. 621-642.
Verzjil, J. H. W. (1968). International Law in Historical Perspective, M.W, Sijthoff/Leiden, Vol. 1.
White, M. (2004). “Equity-A General Principale of Law Recognised by Civilized Nations?”, Queensland Uneversity of Technology, pp. 103-116.
Zimmermann, A. (2006). The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary (Article 38 by A. Pellet), New York, Oxford University Press.