به آیینی و به سامانی:
درستی - سازش - شادی
نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
دانش آموخته دکتری حقوق تجارت و سرمایه گذاری بین المللی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
According to the procedure of the Disciplinary Councils for Construction Engineering Organization (the Council or Councils), the right to disciplinary complaint or defending the client’s rights in the Council should be specified by the letter of authority, either the form of letter of attorney for courts, or the notarized letter of authority. Consequently, based on the said part, the Councils refuse to accept the letter of authority of judiciary attorneys in which the right to disciplinary complaint or defending the client’s rights in these councils is not specified. The Specialized Board for Administrative and Public Affairs of the Administrative Court of Justice in the judgment No. 140431390000924695, dated July 13, 2025, has dismissed a complaint the relief sought of which was the annulment of that part. But is the judgment issued correctly? It seems that the judgment is incorrect and has illogical foundations and bases in its introductions and conclusion; thus, it deserves to criticize from the several point of view. Among the most serious problems in this fallacious judgment are the “unaccepted enthymeme fallacy” and “one-sided assessment fallacy”. The judgement is contaminated..
کلیدواژهها English
