The Journal of Critical Analysis of Judicial Decisions

The Journal of Critical Analysis of Judicial Decisions

Abuse of Local Jurisdiction Rules through the Inclusion of an Improper Defendant; an Assessment of the Award Issued by 10th Branch of the (General) Civil Court of Hamadan

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Ehsan Bahramy 1
Seyed Reza Hashemi 2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law, University of Science and Culture, Tehran, Iran
2 PhD student in private law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
10.22034/analysis.2026.2079041.1154
Abstract
One of the significant challenges in judicial proceedings is the inclusion of an improper defendant in lawsuits—an action often undertaken to abuse local jurisdiction rules, particularly Article 16 of the Civil Procedure Code of. In this method, an individual against whom neither a major nor an minor claim is directed, and who plays no role in facilitating the proceedings, is listed as a defendant to enable the plaintiff to bring the claim before a preferred local jurisdiction. A clear example of this issue can be seen in the award issued by 10th Branch of the (General) Civil Court of Hamadan, where the court, having determined that the inclusion of the second defendant was improper, issued an order dismissing the claim against him pursuant to Subsection 4 of Article 84 of the Civil Procedure Code. The present study, focusing on the critique and evaluation of the above-mentioned award, seeks to answer the following question: What is the proper criterion for establishing the existence of a proper defendant in such cases, and what mechanisms exist to counter this practice? Employing a descriptive-analytical method, the study first explains the categories of defendants—including major defendants, minor defendants, and facilitating defendants—and demonstrates that the widely invoked criterion known as “lack of relevance of the claim to the defendant” is insufficient to identify improper defendants. Reliance on this criterion alone is inadequate and may lead to the erroneous classification of a facilitating defendant as improper. Accordingly, the study proposes a negative criterion for identifying improper defendants: a person shall be deemed a improper defendant if he or she fits within none of the categories of major, minor, or facilitating defendants. Moreover, in addition to dismissal and security for costs order, a proper interpretation of Article 16 of the Civil Procedure Code may serve as an effective mechanism to prevent the abuse of local jurisdiction rules through the insertion of improper defendants.
Keywords
Abuse of Process
Article 16 of the Civil Procedure Code
Improper Defendant؛ Local Jurisdiction
Proper Defendant
- Books
1)     Bahramy, Ehsan (2024). Frivolous Litigation: A Comparative Study in Iranian, English and American Law (with Emphasis on Judicial Proceedings). 1st edition. Tehran: Sahami-ye Enteshr Co. (In Persian).
2)     Eftekhar-Jahromi, Goodarz & Elsan, Mostafa (2022). Civil Procedure, Vol. 2. 3rd edition. Tehran: Mizan (In Persian).
3)     Matin-Daftari, Ahmad (2023). Civil and Commercial Procedure. 6th edition. Tehran: Majd (In Persian).
4)     Mohajeri, Ali (2018). Mabsoot Procedure Civil, Vol. 1. 1st edition. Tehran: Fekrsazan (In Persian).
5)     Nahrini, Fereydoun (2019). Civil Procedure, Vol. 2. 1st edition. Tehran: Ganj-e Danesh (In Persian).
6)     Shams, Abdollah (2006). Civil Procedure (Advanced Course), Vol. 2. 12th edition. Tehran: Derak (In Persian).
7)     Vahedi, Qodratollah (2019). Civil Procedure, Vol. 2. 5th edition. Tehran: Mizan (In Persian).
- Articles
1)     Amerioon, Qolamhossein (1960). Commentary on Article 225 of the Civil Procedure Code. Bar Association Journal, 71: 10–12 (In Persian).
2)     Bahramy, Ehsan; Pishnamaz, Seyyed Amin & Zare, Amir (2022). The Conditions of Being the Claim Against The Heir in Shia’h Jurisprudence And Their Identification Solutions in Iranian Law. The Judiciary Law Journal, 86 (119): 43–66 (In Persian).
3)     Eftekhar-Jahromi, Goodarz & Safiyan, Saeid (2022). The Concept of Relevancy of Claim. Private Law Studies Quarterly, 52 (4): 623–645 (In Persian).
4)     Mohseni, Hassan (2018). Concept and Procedure of Indivisibility of Litigation and Judgment. Private Law Journal, 15 (2): 219–239 (In Persian).
5)     Nahreini, Fereydoon (2023). Persistence Regarding Jurisdiction of the Court upon Submission of a Statement of Claim. The Journal of Critical Analysis of Judicial Decisions, 1 (2), 631-652. doi: 10.22034/analysis.2023.701527
6)     Owji, Amin; Pour‑Erfan, Iraj & Askari, Hekmatollah (2023). Comparative Study of Divisible lawsuits and Separation of Lawsuits in the Civil Procedure of Iran and France. Economic Jurisprudence Studies, 5 (5): 717–734 (In Persian).
- Cases
1) Award No. 140011390001505886 dated 2021‑10‑18, issued by Branch 2 of the General (Civil) Court of Abhar County (In Persian).
2) Award No. 140111390001117190 dated 2022‑08‑24, issued by Branch 8 of the General (Civil) Court of Zanjan County (In Persian).
3) Award No. 140168390000619570 dated 2022‑04‑15, issued by Branch 37 of the General (Civil) Court of Tehran (In Persian).
4) Award No. 140226000007360652 dated 2024‑03‑11, issued by the General Court of Milajerd District (In Persian).
5) Award No. 140228390001943679 dated 2023‑08‑21, issued by Branch 10 of the General (Civil) Court of Hamadan County (In Persian).
6) Award No. 140368390007094846 dated 2024‑08‑12, issued by Branch 214 of the General (Civil) Court, Shahid Moftteh Judicial Complex, Tehran (In Persian).
7) Award No. 140368390007582365 dated 2024‑08‑18, issued by Branch 210 of the General (Civil) Court, Shahid Moftteh Judicial Complex, Tehran (In Persian).
8) Award No. 140401390005940796 dated 2025‑12‑22, issued by Branch 30 of the General (Civil) Court of Karaj County (In Persian).
9) Award No. 4436 dated 2021‑12‑12, issued by Branch 3 of the General (Civil) Court of Maku County (In Persian).
10) Award No. 9409983543101514 dated 2016‑09‑14, issued by Branch 34 of the Supreme Court (In Persian).

- Other
1)     Advisory Opinion No. 212/98/7 dated 2019‑05‑19, issued by the Legal Department of the Judiciary (In Persian).
Advisory Opinion No. 2303/97/7 dated 2018‑11‑06, issued by the Legal Department of the Judiciary (In Persian).