M.A. Thesis:

The Causes of Conflicting Voting in Iranian Law and Their Prevention and Abolishen Procedures

The existence of differences and inconsistencies in the rulings is not due to the differences and conflicts of laws, because in creating domestic laws, unlike the creation and international legislation, there is only one legislative authority, and if this authority observes conflicting laws, ot will correct them. It will, because if these contradictions are not corrected, it will question its competence and cause the people to lose trust in the legislator. Conflict in court rulings means issuing different opinions on a single issue. In fact, conflicting opinions are opinions that are issued without a legal reason, on the same issue and between the same litigants. One of the formal principles governing civil procedure is the principle of preventing the issuance of conflicting verdicts. Although this principle is not explicitly stated in any of the legal articles, the content of many legal articles of the Civil Procedure Code clearly demonstrates the function of this principle and observes that the legislator always aims to prevent the issuance of conflicting sentences in drafting these articles. Considered and tried in this way to take steps to achieve this goal. In Iranian Iaw, the issuance of conflicting votes in tetms of violation of the vote is at the stage of appeal and retrial. The general purpose of this study is to investigate the causes of dissent in Iranian law and ways to prevent and eliminate them, which has been analyzed and argued by descriptive and analytical methods.

Keywords: Conflict, Opposition Voting, Iranian Law, Prevention Strategies