الرافدین للحقوق

Expiry of the cloud storage contract: A comparative legal study

2025-12-01T08:20:14+00:00

The cloud storage contract is a form of cloud computing agreement that falls within cloud hosting arrangements. It is distinguished by the nature of storing data on the Internet, whereby servers and technical infrastructure are provided by a cloud service provider. This provider manages and maintains the infrastructure and ensures that the user can access their data at any time and from any location.

Like all continuous contracts, a cloud storage contract ends naturally upon the expiry of its agreed term. It may also terminate by mutual agreement of the parties, by judicial decision, or by operation of law. To protect the privacy and confidentiality of the user's data the user being the second party in the contract the agreement must include a clause requiring the service provider to delete all stored data and a commitment not to use or disclose it after the contract ends. In order to safeguard the rights of both parties, especially the weaker party, who is typically the user, numerous legal frameworks have been enacted.

This research adopts a comparative approach between Iraqi law and French civil law, with primary emphasis on the Iraqi legal system, to provide a clear legal understanding of the technical concepts and terminology associated with these contracts. The study calls upon the Iraqi legislator to regulate this type of contract in line with developments in other legal systems.

Disputes concerning public order and their arbitrability: A comparative study

2025-12-01T08:35:29+00:00

This research examines the important question of whether disputes involving matters of public order can be resolved through arbitration, whether in domestic or international contexts. Traditionally, many legal systems restrict arbitration by requiring that the dispute not relate to public order, which raises a potential conflict and increases the significance of this inquiry. The study finds that contemporary legal trends particularly within jurisprudence and judicial practice have gradually narrowed the concept of public order in determining arbitrability. As a result, the scope of disputes that may be settled by arbitration has expanded. Public order is no longer viewed as a categorical barrier to arbitration in many types of cases, especially in domestic arbitration, and even more so within international arbitration frameworks.This research examines the important question of whether disputes involving matters of public order can be resolved through arbitration, whether in domestic or international contexts. Traditionally, many legal systems restrict arbitration by requiring that the dispute not relate to public order, which raises a potential conflict and increases the significance of this inquiry. The study finds that contemporary legal trends particularly within jurisprudence and judicial practice have gradually narrowed the concept of public order in determining arbitrability. As a result, the scope of disputes that may be settled by arbitration has expanded. Public order is no longer viewed as a categorical barrier to arbitration in many types of cases, especially in domestic arbitration, and even more so within international arbitration frameworks.

The legal framework of ai-generated derivative intellectual works: an analytical comparative study

2025-12-01T08:45:26+00:00

This research examines intellectual works literary, artistic, and scientific as derivative outputs produced by artificial intelligence using data and information drawn from diverse sources. It seeks to address key questions concerning the nature of AI-generated derivative works, their level of originality, the determination of authorship, and the potential infringements such works may pose to pre-existing copyrights.

In addressing the forms of legal protection, the study distinguishes between derivative works that involve human intervention and those generated autonomously by AI systems. It further explores the underlying philosophy of protecting AI-derived literary and creative works, emphasizing the need to maintain a balance between society’s interest in accessing knowledge and the exclusive rights granted to authors rights that serve to encourage creativity and innovation

The methodology of commentary on legal texts

2025-12-01T09:08:55+00:00

No statutory text can achieve absolute perfection, as it is created by human beings who remain inherently imperfect, even within advanced societies characterized by scientific and technological progress, financial mobility, globalization, and international agreements. Consequently, jurists recognize that statutory texts often fall short of fully addressing these developments. They therefore consider it essential to provide commentary on such texts and to express their perspectives in light of legislation, judicial practice, and Islamic jurisprudence.

Accordingly, it becomes necessary to develop a methodological approach for commenting on legal texts. This begins with a preparatory stage involving both formal and substantive analysis of the text, followed by an editing stage in which discussion, critique, and evaluation are carried out.

The concept of obligations erga omnes within the scope of the rule of allocation

2025-12-01T09:37:11+00:00

This research examines obligations erga omnes as one of the most significant principles of public international law, particularly within the framework of the rule of allocation. This relationship concerns the prioritization of legal sources without establishing an objective hierarchy that ranks one rule above another in the international public order. The interaction between obligations erga omnes and other principles of public international law raises important questions regarding potential overlaps in meaning and application.

Key issues include the extent to which such obligations are binding and enforceable against states, whether they can be classified or divided into categories, and how closely they are linked to the fundamental rules of public international law. International jurisprudence and scholarly legal doctrine play an essential role in clarifying and reinforcing the relationship between erga omnes obligations and more specific state obligations

This study adopts an analytical methodology to interpret relevant legal texts and to explain the legal nature of these obligations and their role in international law. An inductive approach is also employed through close textual reading to derive the intended meanings without distortion.Therefore, these obligations can be compared with the obligations in the face of all in light of the rule of specification in the form that appears more clearly in application, but the final achievement of the result represents a proper application of the obligations in the face of all, and they are pure principles far from coercive rules and include a broader scope than them, but they carry in Its content is a legal and moral obligation to implement that is difficult for states to transgress, whether explicitly or implicitly.

The research sheds light on obligations vis-à-vis everyone, under the rule of privatization, and what that relationship means in terms of arranging those sources in a way of priorities without being subject to an objective hierarchy that arranges the importance of one rule over another in the international public order.

Judicial oligarchy in the united states of america

2025-12-01T10:02:49+00:00

When appointing Supreme Court justices, the American President often prioritizes political considerations and personal loyalty, alongside geographical, racial, and religious factors, in order to appeal to various electoral groups. Legal qualifications, by comparison, have historically been of secondary importance. With the onset of the American Civil War, a new influential class emerged wealthy businessmen who sought to safeguard their economic interests. To protect these privileges, they began to influence state institutions, most notably the Supreme Court. During this period, the Court adopted constitutional interpretations grounded in natural law and capitalist philosophy. This group came to be labeled the "judicial oligarchy" , a term describing the dominance of judicial actors aligned with powerful economic forces. Their influence eventually provoked resistance from both the government and the public, pressuring the Court to shift its stance and embrace a more liberal and socially responsive approach. This shift marked the beginning of the end of the judicial oligarchy era, which lasted from 1861 to 1937.

Political motives behind the dissolution of the kuwaiti parliament: from its establishment to the post–arab spring era

2025-12-01T10:17:33+00:00

Kuwait is one of the few Gulf states that regularly holds parliamentary elections. Nevertheless, the Emir has frequently dissolved the National Assembly before the completion of its term. Between 1976 and 2009, parliament was dissolved six times an average of once every 5.5 years. From 2010 to 2020, it was dissolved four additional times, including twice by the Supreme Constitutional Court, averaging once every three years. Resorting to dissolution as a means of resolving tensions between the legislative and executive branches creates a broader problem: it generates legislative vacuums, destabilizes governance, and disrupts the state’s ability to enact laws and provide essential services. This recurring cycle raises important questions about the underlying motives for such frequent dissolutions and the adequacy of constitutional safeguards meant to ensure that dissolution remains a last resort.

This study examines all dissolution decrees issued since the establishment of the Kuwaiti Parliament, analyzing them within their political context and comparing them with similar decrees issued in the period following the Arab Spring a period that significantly influenced Kuwait as it did neighboring states. The research concludes that appeals to national unity and the need to prevent division and discord were the dominant political justifications for dissolving the legislative council, both before and after the Arab Spring.

The effectiveness of civil service court rulings on the administrative organization associated with the ratification of ordinary court judgments in iraqi law

2025-12-01T10:37:20+00:00

The effect of the judgments issued by the Employees Judiciary Court on administrative decisions, particularly those related to the ratification of rulings of the ordinary judiciary in Iraq, lies in determining the extent to which a disputed judicial ruling may be enforced against an administrative decision, and which of the two judgments prevails. It is well established that the rulings of administrative judiciary courts, in both of their forms, have the authority to enforce administrative decisions even when such decisions originate from ordinary judiciary courts.The reasons behind this overlap stem from the ongoing conflict and ambiguity in the division of subject-matter jurisdiction between the ordinary and administrative judiciaries in countries adopting a dual judiciary system. Iraq became one of these dual-system countries with the issuance of Law No. (106) of 1989, the Second Amendment to the State Shura Council Law No. 65 of 1979, and later with the adoption of the federal system under the 2005 Constitution.

This research examines one of the consequences of the jurisdictional conflict reflected in the conflicting judgments issued by the two judicial bodies, as well as the causes of this conflict, including confusion, lack of independence, and the absence of clear delineation of jurisdiction between courts in Iraq. The Iraqi legislator ultimately succeeded in identifying the competent authorities responsible for resolving these disputes. The task of adjudicating conflicts between the ordinary and administrative judiciaries was assigned to a specialized body called "the Body that Determines Jurisdiction" . In addition, the Supreme Administrative Court was granted the power to resolve jurisdictional disputes between the Administrative Judiciary Court and the Employees Judiciary Court.