Methods of Objecting to Court Judgments
Although, under the law, court judgments are presumed to be just and issued in compliance with legal and religious standards, litigants have the right to object to judgments rendered by courts. This is because there is always a possibility that an error exists in a judgment or that new facts may later be discovered that justify a change to the issued decision.
The methods provided for objecting to court judgments are divided into two categories. Some methods are generally available, while others are applicable only under specific conditions expressly provided by law.
Each method has its own procedural requirements and must be exercised within the statutory time limits. The purpose of this article is to examine the ordinary and extraordinary methods of challenging court judgments.
Cassation Review and Its Distinction from Other Methods of Objection
Methods of Objecting to Court Decisions
After a court of first instance issues its judgment, each party to the dispute is entitled to review the decision. The law allows parties to object to a judgment if they believe it is contrary to the law, provided that the objection is filed within the prescribed legal time limit.
The methods of objection are divided into ordinary and extraordinary remedies, each of which follows its own specific procedures, as explained below.
Ordinary Remedies Against Judgments
Ordinary remedies are generally available unless expressly excluded by law. Iranian civil procedure classifies these remedies as opposition to default judgments and appeals, each with distinct legal consequences.
Opposition to Default Judgments
Opposition is a method of objection applicable exclusively to default judgments. Pursuant to Article 305 of the Civil Procedure Code, this remedy applies when a judgment is issued in the absence of the defendant.
Accordingly, if a judgment is rendered in default, the defendant in the original action may file an objection against the judgment. Under Article 306 of the Civil Procedure Code, the time limit for filing an opposition is twenty days from the date of actual service for residents of Iran and two months for residents abroad.
The court that issued the default judgment has jurisdiction to hear the opposition petition.
Appeal
Where a judgment is subject to appeal, the parties may file an appeal within the statutory time limit, unless the law expressly excludes the judgment from appeal.
The time limit for filing an appeal in criminal matters is the same as in civil cases, namely, twenty days for residents of Iran and two months for residents abroad, calculated from the date of service of the judgment or from the expiration of the opposition period.
Extraordinary Remedies Against Judgments
Cassation Review
Cassation review is an extraordinary method of challenging court judgments. Through this procedure, the challenged judgment is reviewed for compliance with legal and religious standards.
The Supreme Court examines cassation petitions as part of its supervisory function over the correct application of law.
In cassation proceedings, the Supreme Court either affirms the challenged judgment or quashes it and refers the case to the issuing court or to a parallel court of equal rank.
The Supreme Court does not review the merits of the case, but only examines the judgment from the perspective of conformity with legal and religious rules.
Retrial
Retrial is another extraordinary remedy through which the authority that issued the judgment reexamines the case under specific conditions. For example, if new documents or evidence are discovered after the issuance of the judgment that indicate the innocence of a party, a request for retrial may be filed.
The time limit for requesting a retrial is twenty days for residents of Iran and two months for residents abroad.
Third Party Objection
Although court judgments are generally binding only on the parties to the dispute, in some cases, they may affect the rights of third parties.
In such circumstances, any third party whose rights are adversely affected by a judgment may file an objection and request judicial review.
Frequently Asked Questions About Objecting to Court Judgments
Methods of objection are divided into ordinary and extraordinary remedies. Ordinary remedies include opposing default judgments and appealing. Extraordinary remedies include cassation review, retrial, and third-party objection.
Opposition applies only to default judgments and allows the defendant to object within the statutory period. Appeals apply to ordinary judgments and may be filed by either party within the legal time limit.
Cassation review is an extraordinary remedy through which the Supreme Court examines whether a judgment complies with legal and religious standards. The Court may affirm or quash the judgment and refer it to a lower court.
Retrial is permitted when new evidence or documents are discovered after issuance of the judgment, and such evidence could materially affect the outcome.
Yes. If a judgment affects the rights of a third party, that individual may file a third-party objection and request judicial review. What are the methods of objecting to court judgments?
What is the difference between opposition and appeal?
How does cassation review work?
When is retrial permitted?
Can a third party object to a court judgment?
