چکیده:
In the Iranian legal system, official documents and the presumption of possession are two fundamental tools for proving ownership, which have conflicted in numerous cases. An official document is a symbol of public order and registration reliability, while the presumption of possession expresses a customary fact and practical control over property. The main issue of this research is to examine this duality and explain the criteria for prioritizing each in cases of conflict between legal and factual appearances. The goal of the research is to provide a balanced model between the registration function of the official document and the customary validity of possession, in such a way that both the legal security of transactions is maintained and justice in discovering the reality of ownership is observed. The research method is descriptive-analytical and based on the study of jurisprudential sources and domestic and foreign laws. In this path, the theoretical foundations supporting both perspectives, the jurisprudential analysis of the relationship between customary dominance and legal validity, and the examination of the evolution of Iranian judicial practice have been considered. The results of the research show that in the current legal system of Iran, the official document has superiority in terms of social order and reliability in proving ownership; however, in cases of establishing error or obvious conflict with reality, the presumption of possession is considered prior to the official document.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The importance and necessity of examining this subject can be stated from several essential aspects: first, that the current registration system in Iran is based on the authenticity of official documents, yet in real estate litigation, courts still frequently rely on the presumption of possession (yad); second, that in Imami jurisprudence, yad has always been accepted as an original presumption close to the reality of ownership, whereas an official document, since it may be prepared through error or fraud, cannot be absolutely prioritized over yad.
For example, the article "Conflict between the Presumption of Possession (Yad) and the Evidences of Official Documents in Iranian Law" written by Abbasi (2016), Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, No. 35, pages 55 to 80, focusing on the jurisprudential foundations of yad, concludes that yad is prior to the document in proving ownership unless decisive evidence to the contrary exists.
Given the above studies, the innovation of the present research, unlike previous works that have examined only the jurisprudential aspect or only the legal aspect, is that an attempt has been made in this research to establish a balance between the authority of the Sharia presumption of yad and the formality of the legal document from the perspective of the evidences of proving a claim and the rules of la-darar (no harm), istishab (presumption of continuity), and sihhat (validity); and also in this research, there is an explanation of the concept of apparent ownership and its impact on the judicial practice in Iran; a concept that was previously only mentioned scattered in jurisprudence, but here it is used as a link between the official document and yad in an analytical registration system.
(
, 
, 
)
