Thesis:

Commonalities and differences in the methods of protesting legal opinions

Objecting to legal opinions has methods that are the purpose of this article, and these methods have commonalities and differences as well. The existence of disagreements and contradictions in rulings is not caused by the difference and conflict of laws, because in the creation of internal laws, it is contrary to the creation and legislation. Internationally, there is only one legislative authority, and if this authority sees conflicting laws, it will correct them, because if these contradictions are not corrected, it will question its competence and cause people to lose trust in the legislator. will be The purpose of conflict in court rulings is to issue different opinions on a single issue. In fact, conflicting opinions are opinions that are issued without a legal reason, in the same issue and between the same litigants. Among the formal principles governing the civil procedure is the principle of preventing the issuance of conflicting rulings. Although this principle was not clearly stated in any of the legal articles, the content of many legal articles of the Civil Procedure Code clearly shows the function of this principle, and it can be seen that the legislator, in drafting these articles, always aims to prevent the issuance of conflicting rulings. considered and in this way tried to take steps to ensure this goal. In Iranian law, the issuance of conflicting opinions is a violation of the opinion at the stage of appeal and resumption of proceedings.

Keywords: Keywords: commonality and difference, objection to legal votes, Iranian rights, prevention strategiE