Criticism and analysis of the judgment of the 26th branch of the Court of Administrative Justice in the light of procedural justice in the judicial process

Naderi, Mohammad Hosein; Ghamamy, Seyyed Mohammadmehdi; Heydary, Vahid

doi:10.22106/jcr.2024.2001183.1445

Criticism and analysis of the judgment of the 26th branch of the Court of Administrative Justice in the light of procedural justice in the judicial process

Authors

Mohammad Hosein Naderi ¹

seyyed mohammadmehdi ghamamy ²

vahid heydary ³

¹ Public law; Islamic knowledge and law; Imam Sadiq University; Tehran; Iran

² Member of the faculty of Imam Sadiq University

³ Public law: Islamic education and law, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran

10.22106/jcr.2024.2001183.1445

Abstract

Adhering to the legal process in terms of form and observing the rights that are legally assigned to the parties in the said process are important elements of ensuring procedural justice. Failure to consider it, even with the issuance of a substantively correct verdict, causes the judicial verdict to be violated and not legally valid. In This Case, the Disciplinary Appeals Board of Shiraz University faculty members issued a verdict against the appellant's conviction, and the convicted person filed a lawsuit against the verdict issued by the 39th Division of the Court of Administrative Justice, asking for the violation of the verdict. By confirming the decision of the aforementioned quasi-judicial authority, the ground has been prepared for an appeal in the 26th branch of the Appeals Court of Administrative Justice. The appellate branch has issued a ruling to violate the decision of the lower branch due to the lack of compliance with procedural justice and by referring to the differences between the processes followed in the case and the provisions stipulated in the relevant statutes.

Keywords

Procedural justice

primary branches

appeals

formal and substantive aspects of the verdict

Administrative Court of Justice

Subjects