تعدد وكلاي دادگستري و چالش ابلاغ و احتساب مبداء مهلت ها و مواعد (نقد و بررسي چند راي ديوان عالي كشور و دادگاه تجديدنظر استان تهران)

The Multiplicity of Lawyers and The Challenge of Communicating and Calculating Deadlines (Some Critics of Judgments of Supreme and Appeal Court)

اصل ابلاغ به همه و نياز شناسايي اثر براي ابلاغ به همه و منفعتِ يكنواخت كردن جريان دعاوي و رسيدگي ها، دفاع از ديدگاهي را نيرومند مي نمايد كه بر ضرورت ابلاغ به همۀ وكلاي دادگستري و شناخت حق اقدام ايشان تا زماني كه ديگري اقدامي ننموده است پاي مي فشارد. رويۀ قضايي عالي ترين مرجع قضايي كشور (شعب پنجم، هشتم و دهم ديوان عالي كشور) و نيز شماري از دادگاه هاي تجديدنظر استان تهران (شعب دهم و چهل و نهم)، چندگانه است و بر مواد و اصول گوناگوني پشتوانه دارد. برخي شعه ها بر بنياد اصول و تفسيرهاي حقوق مدني و برخي بر اساسا تكاليف اخلاق حرفه اي وكلا به اثر و كفايت ابلاغ به وكيل اول يا وكيل دوم رسيده اند. اين نوشته راي ها و استدلال هايشان را مورد ارزيابي و بررسي قرار مي دهد و بر جدايي حقوق آيين دادرسي از حقوق مدني تكيه مي كند.

The principle of communicating to all and the need to identify its effects for the benefit of all, and the benefit of unification of proceedings, reinforces the defense of the exigence of communicating for all lawyers and to know their right to act until another lawyer does not acted yet. The judgments of Supreme court (5th, 8th & 10th chambers) and some appeal courts in province of Tehran (10th and 49th chamber) is somehow country together, and are based on a variety of articles and principles based of Civil Code interpretation or Procedural Law Practices. Some are based on the principles and interpretations of Civil Code provisions and some have been reached to communicating to the first or second lawyer on the basis of the professional ethics of lawyers. This article reviews and evaluates their views and arguments and relies on the separation of Civil Code from Civil Procedural Law.