النكول عن يمين الاستظهار : دراسة فقهية مقارنة

Abstract EN

The research included a preamble in which it ad- dressed three demands: the first: in defining the oath of memo- rization, the second: in abandoning it, and the third: in its legiti- macy.

The research included two topics: the fir4t of them was: to deny the right of memorization in jurisprudence, and the other: to relinquish the right of memorization in the system.

Hanbali defined the right by saying: Emphasizing the ruling by mentioning most specifically; It is the finest definitions.

I did not know the definition of the memorization oath of applicants.

The terms of the jurists agreed in the definition of indecency and that: abstaining from the oath.

The demonstration oath is given by the jurists, directed by the judge to the plain- tiff, with full evidence.

The right of memorization in the system can be directed to the defendant, and it can be directed to the defendant at the request of the defendant.

Reason for directing the memorization oath: doubt and suspicion when the judge with Kamal A1-Binah.

Right-of-memorization benefit: defendant's precaution and assurance.

The imams of the schools of thought agreed to ally the plaintiff with the evidence in the religious case against the deceased.

Saying the legitimacy of the oath of mem- orization is the view of the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and narration of the Hanbalis.

The right-hand action ofmemorization is quoted from the ancestral collection.

The plaintiff shall be eliminated by turning away from the oath of memorization , so he shall not be ruled by what he claimed, and this Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and narration for this Hanbalis.

Not exposed to the Saudi regu- lator for reneging on the right hand memorization in particular, and the intervention in the text.

The Saudi organizer was not sub- jected to directing the right to the legal person, and his represen- tative was left to the right of the demonstration in particular, and it interfered with the general text.

The attitudes of the judges in Saudi Arabia differed in requesting the oath of the legal person, as follows: The first orientation: directing the oath to the legal person, represented by the direct employee, the owner of the le- gal person, or the direct official.

The second trend: the fall of the oath from the legal personality.