Streamlining Civil Litigation and Reducing the Costs of Litigation through Allowing the Amendment of Statements of Claim in Certain Improperly Brought Actions and Strengthening Measures against Vexatious Claims: A Comparative Study of the Civil Procedure Rules of Iran and England

Shahsavari Shirazi, Hossein; Taheri, Soheil; Ghasemzadeh, Morteza

doi:10.48308/eclr.2025.239051.1142

Streamlining Civil Litigation and Reducing the Costs of Litigation through Allowing the Amendment of Statements of Claim in Certain Improperly Brought Actions and Strengthening Measures against Vexatious Claims: A Comparative Study of the Civil Procedure Rules of Iran and England

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

hossein shahsavari shirazi ¹

soheil taheri ²

morteza ghasemzadeh ³

¹ Ph.D. Student, Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran. Corresponding Author’s email: h.shahsavarishirazi@iau.ac.ir

² Assistant Professor, Department of Humanities, Faculty of Law, South Tehran Azad University, Tehrane, Iran

³ Professor, Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.48308/eclr.2025.239051.1142

Abstract

Under Iranian civil procedure rules, claims brought by a plaintiff with an improper purpose and in bad faith, where no substantive right can be conceived in the plaintiff’s favor, are subject to the sanctions prescribed in Note to Article 109 and Article 515 of the Civil Procedure Code. In legal terminology, such claims are referred to as “frivolous claims.” By contrast, there is another category of claims in which the plaintiff acts without bad faith but commits an excusable error in drafting the statement of claim. These should be regarded as “incorrect claims.” In such cases, the legislature has not provided the plaintiff with an opportunity to cure the defect; rather, the claim is considered to warrant either an order of non-hearing or dismissal. This issue is particularly significant in claims subject to limitation periods, especially in most objection-related proceedings, because the inability to amend the statement of claim may result in irreparable harm and denial of access to justice. In this respect, the English civil justice system has adopted a more flexible approach. Employing a descriptive-analytical method, the present study concludes that the current Iranian rules confine amendment of the statement of claim to very limited formal defects and, through an inflexible approach, prevent substantial amendments such as the addition of a defendant. This is despite the fact that streamlining the civil justice system is possible through expanding the right to amend the statement of claim while, at the same time, establishing mechanisms such as requiring security for the defendant’s potential loss and imposing penalties for frivolous claims. Such an approach would strike a fair balance between the plaintiff’s right of access to court and the need to prevent prejudice to the defendant’s rights.

Keywords

Amendment of statement of claim

procedural principles

frivolous claims

incorrect claims

References

Books

1. Mohajeri, Ali. The Civil Procedure Code in the Contemporary Legal Order. Tehran: Fakrsazan, 2014. (In Persian).

2. Nahrini, Fereydoun. Civil Procedure: Judicial Authorities and Their Jurisdiction; The Scope of Their Competence. Vol. 1. Tehran: Ganj Danesh Publications, 2017. (In Persian).

3. Nahrini, Fereydoun. Civil Procedure: The Litigation Process and Issuance of Judgments. Vol. 3. Tehran: Ganj Danesh, 2021. (In Persian).
Pour Ostad, Majid. Principles and Rules of Transnational Civil Procedure. 1st ed. Tehran: Shahr-e Danesh Legal Studies and Research Institute, 2008. (In Persian).

4. Shams, Abdollah. Civil Procedure. 63rd ed. Tehran: Derak, 2005. (In Persian).
Waline, Jean. Droit Administratif. 26th ed. Paris: Dalloz, 2016.

Articles

5. Auerbach, S. “When the Time Has Come to Say ‘Stop’ to Vexatious Litigants.” Available at:

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/auerbach_dealing-with-vexatious-litigants-summer2012.pdf (accessed February 24, 2025).

6. Badpa, S., and S. Heidari. “Abuse of Procedural Rights in the Legal Systems of Iran and England.” Medical Law Journal, no. 15, 2021, pp. 551–566. (In Persian).

7. Bahramy, E., and M. Elsan. “Penalty as a Sanction for Frivolous Lawsuits: A Comparative Study in Iranian and American Law.” Comparative Law Review, vol. 15, no. 1, 2024, pp. 45–67. doi:10.22059/jcl.2023.366843.634568. (In Persian).

8. Bahramy, E., and M. Elsan. “The Criterion for Identifying Frivolous Claims in Iranian and English Law: A Precondition for Security for Costs Orders and Striking Out the Claim.” Comparative Law Researches, vol. 26, no. 2, 2022, pp. 29–52. (In Persian).

9. Bekker, T. “The Late Amendment of Pleadings: Time for a New Approach? Randa v Radopile Projects CC 2012 (6) SA 128 (GSJ).” Obiter, vol. 38, 2017, pp. 181–192.

10. Boulangeh, Jean. “General Principles of Law and Positive Law.” Translated by Alireza Mohammadzadeh Vadghani. Journal of the Faculty of Law and Political Science, no. 36, 1997, pp. 73–100.

11. Camilleri, Simon P. “Amendments to Statements of Case: Learning the Hard Way; PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov and Others [2016] EWHC 2816 (Comm).” Civil Justice Quarterly, 2017, pp. 297–301.

12. De Young, M. “The Day Care Ritual Abuse Moral Panic: A Sociological Analysis.” Sociology Compass, vol. 2, no. 6, 2008, pp. 1719–1733. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00169.x.

13. Elsan, M., and M. Fathi. “Frivolous Claims: Concept and Strategies to Reduce Them; A Comparative Study of Iranian Case Law and U.S. Law.” Journal of Comparative Law, vol. 6, no. 1, 2022, pp. 23–38. doi:10.22080/LPS.2022.23469.1333. (In Persian).

14. Ghamami, M., and H. Mohseni. “About Some Innovations and Weaknesses of the Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure.” Law Quarterly, vol. 43, no. 2, 2013, pp. 39–58. doi:10.22059/jlq.2013.35269. (In Persian).

15. Gholizadeh Manghutay, A. “A Legal Analysis of Bringing in a Third Party as a Mere Follower in Litigation.” Law Quarterly, vol. 50, no. 2, 2020, pp. 339–358. doi:10.22059/jlq.2020.281701.1007217. (In Persian).

16. Hormozi, K. “The Change of the Mode of Claim.” Law Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 4, 2016, pp. 645–663. doi:10.22059/jlq.2016.60015. (In Persian).

17. Judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran. “National Judicial Rulings System.” n.d. Available at: [insert official URL] (accessed [insert date]).

18. Khandani, V., M. B. Amiri-Nia, G. Karimi, and D. Babaei. “The Strategic Principle of the Sovereignty of Will in Iranian and English Law.” Quarterly Journal of Comparative Legal Research of Iran and International Law, vol. 12, no. 45, 2019, pp. 233–258. (In Persian).

19. Mohseni, Hassan. “Formal and Substantive Defects in Civil Procedure.” Private Law Research Quarterly, vol. 6, no. 2, 2014, pp. 139–160.

20. Mohseni, H. “The Concept of Procedural Principles, Their Interpretive Role, and the Distinction Between These Principles and Procedural Formalities.” Journal of Kanun-e Vokala, nos. 192–193, 2006, pp. 100–131. (In Persian).

21. Moloudi, M., B. Haji Azizi, and M. Hamzehhoweyda. “Modification of Imperfect Acts in Civil Procedure.” Journal of Studies in Islamic Law and Jurisprudence, vol. 10, no. 19, 2018, pp. 329–358. doi:10.22075/feqh.2017.12323.1247. (In Persian).