Competent court to deal with the third executive objection in cases of issuing judicial commission; grantor of commission or its executor
(Justification and criticism of the uniform judicial vote No. 802 - 18/09/1399 of the General Council of the Supreme Court)
By Dr. Reza Shah Husseini
Articles 146 and 147 of the Law on the Implementation of Civil votes, under the title of third party objection, deal with the method of objection by a third party to the confiscation of the property of the losing party and how to deal with it without the third party objecting to the principle of the decision. This type of objection against the third party's objection to the principle of the vote (main objection) is known as executive third party objection. In many cases, the property of the losing party is located outside the jurisdiction of the court issuing the original judgment under which the enforcement action is under its jurisdiction. In these cases, the court delegates the seizure and continuation of executive operations to another court by granting judicial commission. Regarding the jurisdiction of the court handling the third party's executive objection to the confiscation of property, there is a difference in inference between the court granting judicial commission and the court executing it. The Supreme Court of the country, according to the uniform judicial vote No. 802-18/9/1399, has taken action by separating the general judicial commission and the commission with respect to certain property in order to resolve the dispute and create unity of procedure. The uniform judicial vote can be justified in some ways and it seems to be criticized in other ways. In this article, while justifying the said vote, we have also noted the points of criticism.