<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Tehran</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Law Quarterly</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2588-5618</Issn>
				<Volume>38</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2008</Year>
					<Month>03</Month>
					<Day>20</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>PROCEDURAL JUSTICE: SOME OBSERVATIONS ON CIVIL JUSTICE THEORIES</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>PROCEDURAL JUSTICE: SOME OBSERVATIONS ON CIVIL JUSTICE THEORIES</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage></FirstPage>
			<LastPage></LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">19430</ELocationID>
			
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>1970</Year>
					<Month>01</Month>
					<Day>01</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>Procedural Justice concerns the way and method of drawing Justice System. Questions about it are remarkably persistent. We can find here different Theories: What is the aim of civil dispute resolution; Accuracy or solving the conflicts of interests anyway. Some others, in the utilitarian tradition have argued that procedural fairness can be reduced to the calculation of costs and benefits. The third theory called Participation that assumes that the very idea of a correct outcome must be understood as a function of process that guarantees fair and equal participation. The participation is not well-defined, because it rests on uncertain and varying foundations: for this reason, we will investigate four interpretations for it such as: Dignity, Satisfaction, Rational discourse and finally, Gaming.</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">Procedural Justice concerns the way and method of drawing Justice System. Questions about it are remarkably persistent. We can find here different Theories: What is the aim of civil dispute resolution; Accuracy or solving the conflicts of interests anyway. Some others, in the utilitarian tradition have argued that procedural fairness can be reduced to the calculation of costs and benefits. The third theory called Participation that assumes that the very idea of a correct outcome must be understood as a function of process that guarantees fair and equal participation. The participation is not well-defined, because it rests on uncertain and varying foundations: for this reason, we will investigate four interpretations for it such as: Dignity, Satisfaction, Rational discourse and finally, Gaming.</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Cost &amp;  Benefits</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Economics of Procedure</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Fair and equal participation</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Finding the truth</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Principles  of Procedure</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Procedural Justice</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Solving the disputes</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://jlq.ut.ac.ir/article_19430_ce6897bcc4dd184cfb842f3b5f91cba6.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
