THE IMPACT OF THE PENAL COURT VERDICT IN THE COURT OF LAW O IMPACTO DO VEREDICTO DO TRIBUNAL PENAL NO TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA

Declarations, endorsements the decisions of the penal judge in the civil litigation and affairs, have credibility of the dismissed affair and absolute sovereignty, in relation to all issues." The principle slogan that we are to state it is this point, an affair which is reflected in the literature of all legal systems and official sources, and its doctrine and jurisprudence on the basis has been clarified relatively.


INTRODUCTION
In a legal system, the principle of unity of decision-making and refusal of opposition of votes requires that two or more different references with an expressive language of this system together, have legal life peacefully and respect each other's opinions to maintain legal unity.

The substantive principle or probative evidence
The results that are obtained from different parts of the legal system are applicable in other sectors in two different ways which in our discussion that is the results in the imposition of penal decisions in civil issues can be seen; one of the ways is the realization and the other one is probative; realization way means the requisite outcome acts as substantive principle and has the same effects.Although the result of one of the sections is an independent principle and is equal to other rules of law and its reliability have not any relations with primary arrangements.Such as whatever is discussed over the principle of validity of the dismissed affair and the nature of the dismissed has adjudged with the substantive rules of law not legal affairs __________________________________________________________________ Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417   399 or non-shippable presumptions. 4After the adjudication of the verdict, does not take the prerequisites of its validity and is independently validated therefore the claims of ruling out the reasons for the issuance or proof are against the introduction of its subject matter, and has no impact on its validity because it acts as substantive principle and its relationship with appearances and arrangements of subject is interrupted.
In our discussion also the certain issue is that the verdict of the Penal Court can always be a cited reason.This option at the French law is depended on that through the governing presumptions and evidences on civil principles also we can affirm the verdict or in other words the civil principles, per se, allow the reception of probative evidence from the penal method. 5 may at penal litigation a vote be issued that has not the dismissed validity, meaning substantive and independent principle, at civil litigation in order to limit the freedom of civil judge but it would not prevent affirmative aspects of it.A Vote which warrants a sentence of intentionally causing damage, involvement in drug trafficking, and so on can be the reason for the divorce or marriage annulment.The affirmations of penal judge in these cases is not in terms of ruling of penal dismissed at civil affairs but also due to its affirmative dignity is subordinate to the effects and side effects of civil proving grounds therefore the confession or the testimony of others in the penal court and its reflection in the verdict, cannot be considered a preferred mode of proof and cause ignoring its principles and rules in civil matters.
In all cases where a penal vote is for the reason of using, mentioning the validity principle of penal dismissed in civil affair is not proper because the resulted impacts of penal verdict in fact, "are civil results that come as a result of the decision of conviction rather than being relevant to the content of certifications and declarations of Penal Court.They are accepted only as affirmative effects." 6 If the credit of penal court verdict be accepted as the dismissed affair at civil litigation, it will prevent the freedom of Civil Procedure.
come as a result of the decision of condemnation, not as be relevant to content of the penal declarations and affirmations.They are as the probative evidences."Therefore are among the reasons of affirmation, not validity of penal verdicts in the civil litigations.In contrast to these specific texts, the French civil law of 1351it is cited and documented.In this article the validity of dismissed at the civil litigation is mentioned and unity of cause, the litigation parties and the subject is discussed.In the 19th century there was disagreement between the legal authors of this text.Merlin according to Article 1351 has defended the validity of penal verdict toward a civil litigation and, in turn, believed in produce 9 the lack of the mentioned credit and the freedom of assessment of the civil judge from the penal verdict. 10The authors reported that there is not cause and subject of unity between the civil and penal and their litigation subsequently and therefore applying Article 1351 which is related to the civil proceedings will not be accepted toward criminal lawsuit.Finally, the "the conflict between civil and criminal verdict that according to public order is prohibited, is not actually possible and practical, and in some cases does not seem tolerable?
Whether in some cases that a civil litigation has been broached and adjudged before the criminal case or appealed from the court verdict to condemnation of the civil sector, or when someone in the court of criminal has been acquitted and sentenced to pay compensation in a civil lawsuit at the same time there is not the possibility of tolerance." 13 The fundamental problem of this principle is that denies the freedom of assessment of the civil judge and causes the penal verdict, prohibits defending and providing solutions against the individuals who were not present in litigation.Nevertheless the validity of the rule of law is consistent at Roman-Germanic systems and also Iranian law and made moderation doesn't notice the general principle but mostly notices its impacts.

features of the principle
The essence of penal dismissed validity in a civil litigation regarding the validity of its principles is clear.The implementation of this principle is due to necessity of penal judge's role and importance of the influences of his decisions, so this rule, has a penal nature and has two Unlike the validity of penal dismissed which is relative and only is applied against both parties and the same cause, the validity of penal dismissed, contains the absent persons of criminal proceedings and the fundamental flaw of it lies in this feature.Why should a vote to which has been issued among other people and prosecuting attorney, knows the necessity of consideration of failure of penal principle against a certain person, can also be applied to other persons?Is it not possible that the vote is based on elements which involve evaluating other people's rights?
The mentioned response and its flaws each of them has a flavor of scientific rationality, but an important part of the drawbacks can be resolved by the independency of the penal law, and with proper analysis of this discussion, it can be achieved appropriate response.

403
The feature based on Public order and authoritatively Is Validity of penal dismissed in civil litigations based on principles that the both parties have, and only by its layout, civil judge is bounded regardless of it, and is imposed violently and mandatory?In French law, the position of doctrine and judicial practice is different.Judicial practice for moderating the absolute property of the principle, doesn't know it due to public order but private benefits of the person. 16While legal doctrine, criticizes this approach, and knows it as based on penal order and having the property of the principle.From French judicial perspective, credibility is nothing more than a rebuttable legal jurisdiction and against Validity of penal dismissed in civil litigations that undoubtedly is imperative.The mentioned validity is in hands of beneficiary, therefore, firstly, the parties can deviate from this principle17 second, if the parties do not cite it, judge or prosecutor cannot proceed directly to it18 and thirdly, this principle cannot be raised for the first time at the Supreme Court and of ultimate stage. 19ntioning the point should be useful that the validity of penal dismissed in civil litigation, in terms of juridical procedure, isn't similar to the civil validity in civil or penal in penal because according to the penal dismissed we cannot know the civil litigation as "inaudible" but with the arrival in the nature of a civil litigation, "the verdict of right less" of criminal against the penal vote be issued.In other words, a civil litigation, by citing of penal dismissed, met with no objection but civil judges consider verdict as one of the fundamental principles of his decision and based on that, sentences, pro or against someone.

ORATION OF PRINCIPLE
Is the description of "civil" in principle of penal dismissed validity in "civic" litigations and issues have a specific stand on sealed of criminal proceedings and is used only in civil matters and commercial credit, or in other words "private rights" and other issues such as administrative, constitutional, tax and authorities dependent on them are not subject to principle or the conditions of these issues, are same as civil and private proceedings.The reason __________________________________________________________________ Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417 405 somehow brings harmony and unity.About the authorities of verdict should also be specified conditions of penal decision and the terms of authorities.In addition, that part of the penal decision that has the essential aspect of the guidance should be separated.

Which decision qualifies for thi s credibility?
A decision has penal dismissed validity that has been adjudged from the National Court and contains attributes that is in following.

Issuing authority
Territoriality principle of implementation of criminal law does not allow that the criminal decisions, foreign court, be a barrier for audition or limitation of civil decision.The judicial practice22 decisively and French doctrine in general, affirms it because the Foundations of the Validity (avoiding compromising the laws and public order) is not in such a way that causes damages out of foreign penal dismissed validity and not be negligible.In addition, the executive power is the main part of penal vote validity while this feature is limited to the territorial boundaries of a foreign court.
The penal votes should be out of "substantive vote"23 .Substantive vote adjudicating authorities are ahead of investigation authorities24 and in terms of their decision-making process that re in the presence of the prosecutor and the accused and the acting principle of neutrality , is of great importance in realizing of penal dismissed validity.
The issued decisions from the investigation authorities (the ban of prosecution 25 and conviction and sending the case to court) 26 according to the authors and judicial practice, have not validity per se.On this distinction can be argued that decisions of investigation authorities, are not in a place that causes arising validity, the characteristic of decision of investigation authority (Court) is that it represents the reasons for the charges and the realization of criminal __________________________________________________________________ Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417 406 act stronger and strengthens their verdict in court 27 but our prospective validity should be obtained from non-infringement and absolute decision not occurs by a not adjudicated decision.The ban of prosecution does not implies the negation of civil works and in cases where the court assesses the elements of a criminal act it deals with evidence aspects rather than the affirmation.Proof of operation and its elements is characteristic of the court and the authorities of investigation this situation cannot be seen.
This analysis can be criticized and rejection and accuracy of the performance of prosecutors indicates that validity of decision of the court cannot be overlooked in some cases.

Terms of verd ict
A decision in a civil lawsuit has penal dismissed validity that has some terms or haven't some obstacles that most important of them are as follows: 1.
Any decision of the Criminal Court, have not such validity.As was observed in some cases, civil court, adjudicate a verdict that has penal qualities.In contrast, some criminal court decisions have not features which are related to criminal law and therefore are considered invalid.The description of being "Penal" two types of decision can be known irrelevant and thus invalidates the penal dismissed validity: 1. law enforcement decision 2. Civil decision whit in the criminal proceedings.
The verdict that is adjudicated at Law enforcement issues has not public domain and it addresses a limited number of professionals and not about the entire community.Connection of these kind of verdicts with public opinion is not conclusive and some administrative considerations are respected because The Law enforcement court decision in a civil compensation proceeding, has not penal dismissed validity and civil court despite the state of law court for the realization of fault, can refrain the judgment of citing compensation by referring to lack of fault. 28 2. The Penal court decision that contains civic parts such as compensation is subject to the terms of penal dismissed affair. 29In French law, even despite the absence of someone in criminal proceedings, the court in the decision-making stage, determines the civic responsible, for example, considers insurer or employer as liable for compensation.In these cases, verdict validity is subject to impacts of civil penal dismissed and has no absolute penal validity. 30.
Determining the amount of damages by the court and declaring someone responsible, prevents posing civil lawsuit proceedings against this person and his defense is not about the compensation litigation. 31.Determining joint and several responsibilities for two or more persons in criminal votes doesn't prevent applying a different principle in a civil lawsuit because of joint liability, is not punishment but a way of receiving compensation or fine in cash. 32certainty is when the decision of the penal court is for determining civil responsibility, at the request of the prosecution and for conviction of someone for paying the expenses.Some believes that the prosecutor acts in the name of Society and has the absolute verdict, because paying the expenses is in accordance with the goals of criminal law.French Court from 1898 has acted against the idea and civil property of such a decision has recognized valid. 33Because the involvement of prosecutors has not criminal purposes and only is protection of the government's financial rights.
3. The verdict must be inviolable and passed stages of research or appeal.There are doubts about sentences in absentia that whether on the basis of penal sentence in absentia can we build a civil construction and lean against on it although due to the possibility of deviating from the votes and by protestation and representing reasons, a vote can be changed, this option is unthinkable.The French Court does not accept such validity because as soon as the presence of the accused or his imprisonment, convictions ends, and its reliability is excluded. 34 seems that other solutions that ensure the dismissed credibility at the Iranian law is more accurate because the problem is that civil litigation is the ability to run in absentia which is also and violations of it will also be possible; is it possible to ignore a certain vote fundamentals 30 Civ.2 dec. 1928, D.H. 1929, 51,S, 1931.1.201, note Hagueeney ;12 mars 194712 mars .D. 194712 mars . 296.S. 194712 mars .1.195. 31 Com. 22 juill. 195212 mars , D. 1952. 746. 746.according to Article of July 11, 1956 civil branch of the French Court if the result of an accident between two vehicles, criminal justice, determines a "driver," as "criminal charge" and "owner" of the vehicle as a "civil responsibility" and the injured who is not present in the criminal proceedings subsequently seek redress in the civil courts and the driver to be determined as a responsible by the civil judge, which may be non-owner, we cannot express the opposition in the vote because the first vote has not the penal dismissed validity: J.C.P. 1956.II.9584, nite P. Esmein." Esmein " about the votes says that in these cases, judicial practice has the legal and practical possibility for accepting opposite decisions because the decision is not a matter of validity. 32Civ 9 nov.1881, S.1884, 1.217; P.Garraud, L'influence au civil d;une décision pénale déclarant connexes diverses infractions, J.C.P , 1943, II.2483. 33Civ.14 nov.1898, D.P.99.99.1.65,note sarrut. 34Civ.24 juin1898, 5 janv.1898, S. 99.1.129,note Lacoste.

__________________________________________________________________
Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417 408 and decide against them.In fact, what makes hesitation in accepting the dismissed validity, is the possibility of violation of the provisions of votes after the protestation, while on the other commandments there is also the possibility of retrial and they only differ in the intensity and weakness of this possibility but fundamentals of accepting the validity is remaining strongly and it seems there are not reasons to deviate from absentia penal vote at civil litigation.
Which part of the decision is eligible for this validity?

General principle -the technique
In common law legal system for the detection of necessary parts of court decision at leading and non-binding sections, the segregation of provisions and verdict appliances is used.
That part of the court decision that is essential and original document of verdict has the power to create a record and requirement and the other section which is considered sub-sector and has been stated without taking into account a certain event, is not required. 35This method is very accurate and elegant, and being inattentive to it, causes changing in the legal Rule.In discussing penal dismissed validity in civil matters such separation is necessary and should distinguish the part of the vote that has this validity with invalid parts.But what is the basis of this distinction and how can consider a part of penal verdict as invalid?
To answer this question primarily we should consider a guiding principle thus in cases of doubt, at least indicate the outward verdict; since tying up the civil judge and limiting the assessment and analysis of civil matters by penal verdict content and to compliance with its provisions we have to prove the validity and the first principle, is justice liberty in the investigation of litigation cases therefore, in case of doubt of the penal dismissed validity in civil issues, the principle is absence of such a matter.In addition the mentioned validity is a ban of the freedom of civil court and is required a reason for his authority, since the penal vote is of absolute validity and does not consider the person and absent person and is not bound by the prosecutor's office therefore, this is an alternative explanation in contrary to the principle of being and consequently the necessity of proving it. 35The essential and necessary section is titled ratio decidendi and subdivision and unnecessary section is called obiter dictum.seems that there is an accident" or these issues "probably" are as they are and don't have certainty and do not seem certain. 43A decision that requires interpretation because of uncertainty also doesn't have such validity and, in general, Civil judge should rely on the principle that the criminal case has been proved decisively and definitely, and the judicial science be proven and backup of it, not suspicion.
2-A principle which is not convinced in the mind of the penal judge is invalid.If the thought of the judge who issued the verdict indicates totality of the vote and reflects certainty toward an issue, it cannot be relied upon.This feature may be another interpretation of being convinced but has a subtle difference because in the case of being convinced, is stressing the presumption of innocence and legal issues of the verdict.In other words, the penal judge after examining the elements of the litigation, based on the presumption of innocence, makes the decision.In this case, exists the possibility of and uncertainty in the vote but does not mentioned in verdict of the penal judge and these doubts can be removed only on the basis of the presumption of innocence.That part of the court verdict which cannot be canceled by the presumption of innocence principle is invalid because it leaves doubt and in not certain, but if the penal judge expressly states that the issue is not convinced therefore will be canceled by the presumption of innocence principle, and is affective in civil decision and will committed the civil judge, because this principle (being unconvinced ) is mentioned as one of the stipulated parts of final verdict and it strengthens the presumption of innocence principle, or in other words, what is proven is the lack of principle fulfillment, and it will be valid in civil vote. 44esumption of innocence of doubt, is such as Presumption due to lack of action, and when penal verdict declares an action unacceptable though with the presumption of innocence, the civil judge must comply otherwise it implies a violation of the penal court.

Critical statements 45
The part of the penal vote which is indispensable for the authenticity of its nature and the so-called "was judged by necessity of it" 46 is validated in a civil lawsuit.The critical affirmation is that if it is asked from penal judge why he has recounted and proved or disproved them, he would answer I had no choice, and if I haven't mentioned them, an incomplete, 43 Req. 16 juill. 1928, D.P. 1929.1.33, note Savatier;civ. 1 aoû1864, D.P. 1864.1.428. 44 Trib Grand instance.Riom, 15 dec. 1965, D. 1966.115. 45 Les constatationsnécessaires 46 Chose nécessairementjugée.

__________________________________________________________________
Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417 411 incomprehensible and wrong verdict would be issued.These issues are within the framework of criminal justice task and that is why just these issues are valid.Civil judge is subject only to the affairs of the body of the criminal vote and essential support of them. 47Each section of the Criminal vote which can be removed without disturbing its authenticity will not be valid.For example, in a litigation breach of trust, property or document delivery and so on, the committed act in the possession and the same is of appliances of verdict and these things are valid in a civil lawsuit but if the penal judge as investigating the delivery of property, declares that they were for the loan contracts not due to deposit, "borrowed" there is no requirement for any accuracy of vote and can be eliminated from penal vote and that is why is invalid in civil lawsuit.This situation is confirmed by all the writers in any legal systems who believe in penal dismissed validity in civil litigation principle. 48r closer examination of this condition, some of the most common problems and issues which is raised in civil and criminal lawsuit and in each case of penal dismissed validity principle is expressed here.
The common approvals of the consti tuent ele ments of a crime 49 1-If the person is convicted; realization of material element, assumptions and whatever criminal judge declares in this case is valid.For example, if the committing crime is by the object or an animal under his control and the penal judge has approved it, this principle is for the application of Article 1384 of the Civil Code on Civil Liability of France is valid.All other types of material actions and quitting actions also has the same situation, but it should be noted that the purpose of the action or omission of an action is material and external act not civil impacts or legal descriptions of action, or penal dismissed in civil litigations.For example, the delivery of the property to another on the specified or non-specified contract or even mere satisfaction may also be permissible or correct or false.What is important is external and material action that is to deliver not civil impacts and testimonials.Penal vote around the same acts is valid, not the civil and legal situation.For this reason, the criminal law may not blame the committing 47 "Les motifs qui font corps avec lui, qui ensont le soutien necessaire," Req. 21 janv. 1941, Gaz. Pal. 1941.1.135;Crim. 28 juin 1961, Bull.Crim., n. 311;Paris, 15 janv.1964, Gaz. Pal. 1964.1.293. 48  412 certain action with respect to their own purposes, but blame the same action with respect to civil rights.
2 -Spiritual element is referred to the concept of fault and the ability of recording it.
The descriptions of the fault as light, heavy or very heavy does not impact the civil lawsuit because all kinds them are non-intentional and thus as the "common and comprehensive value" are valid unless in both sections of penal and civil such a classifications be critical for determining the penalties and damages.However, in the latter case can be defended that even if for the penal verdict, the degree of culpability, is important again the civil judge by using his Because the mentioned culpability, in not distinct from criminal culpability. 52The legal defense also cancels all the blame and a lawsuit of compensation for damage caused by it, is not justified. 5350 H.etL.Mazeaud et Tunc, op. cit, n. 1821. 51 civ 10 avr. 1962, Bull. Civ., II,n. 394;Civ. 10 janv. 1962, Bull.Civ.,ll, n. 43;22 juin 1962 Bull. Civil, ll,

413
The approval of the damage -About the substance and extent of damages the main principle is lack of verdict validity because criminal law, doesn't consider the extent of the damage.In cases where, in particular, the damages caused by an offense or the type of crime is effective in penalties and according to the type of injury (physical, financial) or the amount of it, differs, referring the penal vote to it, requires civil judge to comply with its. 54e approval of causal relationship For analysis of this part of the penal vote, we can get help of the rules of the previous section as the principle.This means that if the committing losses are superfluous and is not considered necessary in criminal verdict, causal relationship between the committed act and the damage is superfluous.On the contrary, if essential condition of an offense is the damage the causal relationship will also be an essential part of verdict.Alongside the above principle, it should be noted that the statements of the criminal judge about the causal link should be relevant to the act and committing crime of the accused.For example, it should be declared that the defendant personally or with another person has participated in the offense, and is effective in damages but if it is declared that the external factors such as natural disasters and even culpability or culpability of third party (without participation in the offense) such statements has not the penal dismissed validity. 55hat are the external causes and their role in the causal relationship when the sentence is issued?If the judge condemned criminal who has committed a traffic accident and refers beside the vote to the injury impact and realizes him effective in losses and blame him, such an issue in France and Egypt legal system hasn't the penal dismissed validity in civil rights and the civil judge can assess all damages independently vote in favor of injured. 56The judge can consider a rather different proportions in terms of the division of responsibility of damages and the severity of culpability attributable to the accused in criminal lawsuit, cannot prevent civil judge to re-evaluate the causal relationship between culpability of injured and damages. 57 54 Valticos, op.cit, n. 293;Civ 5 janv. 1956, D, 1956.236, J.C.P. 1956.II. 9140, note Pageaud. 55 H.et L.Mazeaud et Tunc, op.cit., n 1803et 1840;Valticos, op.cit, n. 307. 56 Civ. 16 juin 1965, Buii.Civ., II, n. 513;Civ. 10 févr. 1931, S. 1933. 1. 57 , note Esmein;Req. 13 déc. 1932, Gaz. Pal. 1933. 1.420;Grenoble, 22 mars 1929, D.P. 1930.2.33, note Holleaux. 57 Paris, 15 juill. 1930, Gaz. Pal. 1930.2.641;Civ.22 avr. 1959Civ.22 avr. , D. 1959.somm.sommThe role of in state of Presumption of innocence is like when the accused is convicted, if the judge has declared about the external cause, civil judge can vote in someone else's responsibility. 58If a person was acquitted in criminal lawsuit and criminal justice considers it due to the committing culpability by a third party, the civil judge cannot condemn the third party. 59.
In all situations in which the criminal court has no impact on verdict and in not of its essential components, a civil judge should not be bound to follow it.The presumption of innocence verdict with respect to the lack of a causal link culpability of accused to damage, has the penal dismissed validity in civil lawsuit, but in the realization of this relationship about another person or factors, there is validity.

CONCLUSIONS
The Necessity of comply the penal court with penal verdict in all cases, as a definite and common principle, which is referred about the mentioned view, is without religious or legal valid justification, and the necessity of adherence pf legal courts to the criminal Law Courts of introduction premise, is in fact, deprivation and violation of the rights of people of their litigation rights in the framework of the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.
All decisions of the Criminal Court have not such validity.As it was observed in some cases, the civil court, adjuncts a verdict that has penal descriptions.In contrast, some criminal court decisions have not features related to criminal law and therefore are considered invalid.
The terms of being "penal" it can refer to two types of decision out of the debate and therefore without the dismissed validity principle: 1. the decision of the Law enforcement 2. Civil decision in the criminal litigation The verdict which is adjunct at Law enforcement issues has not a public domain and it addresses to a limited number of professionals and not about the entire community.
It is stated over the validity of penal verdict at civil, there is no discussion about conflict, so we cannot by the excuse of avoiding it, vote in favor of the penal verdict.Civil and penal decisions are two distinct dignities; on the one hand, there is the violation of the criminal law and punishment and on the other hand there is a violation of individual right and compensation .Therefore there is a conflict between them.The legal status of Anglo-Saxon in general that have forgotten such a rule, German law which is on the return of this rule, Netherlands and Portugal that have put aside the characteristic of such principle and allow the proof of the its contrary, it is implies the weakness of principles therefore should not afraid of criticism.Many mistakes that can be observed in penal votes also are represented a doubt with respect to the above principle.The claim of benefit superiority in criminal matters is not peremptory and without defects because sometimes in civil litigations, there are very important benefits that 10 Répertoir de droit pénal et de procédure pénale, op.cit, n.73. 11Colin et Capitant, Traité de droit civil fran Cais, par julliot de La Morandiere, T .2,1948, n.796.__________________________________________________________________ Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417 401 Criticism of basics 27-In Iranian law, Doctor Nasser Katouzian also has the popular opinion and definite doctrine and considers the adjunction of the verdict of the Criminal Court as the assurance condition on achieving penal dismissed validity of civil matters.See Hemo, Validity of judgment in a civil lawsuit, Page 295.
28 pau, 31 déc.1963,J.C.P. 1963.IV.43.  2v.18avr.1921, S. 1923.1.161.noteMorel; 7 Juin 1921, Gaz.Pal.1921.2.147.__________________________________________________________________ Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417 407 Legal writers and judicial practice have suggested criteria for the identification of penal provisions votes that their return is to a principle and different interpretations, does not change this principle.In one of the authors opinions penal dismissed in civil issues is applied only " toward advices that the penal court, should have applied or apply them."36Thefamous vote of March 7, 1855 of the French Court has been declared in this case that the mentioned validity is applied at what have been decided in criminal proceedings, "Whether at the existence or lack of action, which is common in civil and criminal litigations or to be announced for involvement or lack of involvement and participation of the accused." 37In another vote also has been declared that "the principle under which the votes find validity at penal court in civil matters has been used in the sense that the civil judge cannot ignore the verdict which the penal judge have voted about the existence and descriptions of a criminal act or criminality of accused." 38 French law proceedings, according to declarations of "Esmein" are trying to segregate the content of penal verdict and discover the necessary parts."Esmein" states "The accused should seek to describe and segregate the penal decision and remove what is not required for validity of verdict, so that we can reduce the material which is not justifiable from vote skeleton." For consideration of this discussion see: Rene David, Kami Zhoufre Aspynovzy, ibid., P. 219.doctor Abdul Hussein Shiravi, ibid., P 134 later.__________________________________________________________________RevistadeDireitodaCidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417 409 39The vested statemen ts and certaintyThe purpose of this title, is that part of the vote which proving it, in terms of penal judge, is granted and doesn't appear with doubt or the possibility or being preferable.To clarify it the non-penal statements can be sub-divided into two parts.1.Non-certain statements 40 2.Non-convinced statements 41 1-Civil Judge by no means in not bound to respect statements and confirmation by a non-certain statement.The penal vote have validity only when is definitely justified.In terms of judicial practice and doctrine, the certain statements are those that in a certain, accurate and explicit manner have been presented and verified.42Thegeneral and vague expressions like "it 42 -"Les constatationsdoiventétreexpriméesd'unemaniereCertain et formelle, expresse, precise ou positive" Répertoire de droit penal et de procedure pénale, op.cit, p. 110; Aix 10 oct 1950, J.C.P. 1951.II.__________________________________________________________________ Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol.11, nº 1. ISSN 2317-7721 pp.397-417 410 Doctor Nasser Katouzian, earlier, p 297. Alsohvary, doctor Abdul Razak Ahmad, former Page 167.PierreBouzat et jean pinatel, op.cit., op.cit.,n.1544.  4s enonciationsrelativas aux élémentsconstitutifs de l'infraction.
principles, can determine assessment of the fault rather than what has stated by criminal judge.If the criminal judge declares that there is no fault, what will come up?In this case the distinction between civil and criminal culpability will help us, so that if criminal law is to condemn all types of culpabilities, such a declaration has penal dismissed validity because the essential part is reprehensible, but if the culpability is censurable, the civil judge can authenticate the civil culpability, though its criminal type has not been established.
50These issues are reflected in the judicial procedure in this way that if criminal judge does not know a driver committed in unintentional injury of no indiscretion the civil judge cannot vote in compensation for body damages of vehicle by the excuse of lighting defects of vehicle and perpetrate the act.51OnOctober 10, 1958 the French Court verdict states that Presumption of innocence of the employer or his representatives' injury caused by negligence doesn't leave any permission for Civil judge's to declare the non-forgivable culpability of Article 65 of Law 30 October 1946.