5. منابع
1-5. منابع فارسی و عربی
الف) کتاب‌ها
1. الانصاری، شیخ مرتضی (۱۴۲۲ق.). کتاب المکاسب. قم: مؤسسه النشر الاسلامی.
2. دهخدا، علی‌اکبر (۱۳۸5). لغت‌نامه: فرهنگ متوسط دهخدا (به کوشش غلامرضا ستوده، ایرج ملکی و اکرم سلطانی). دورۀ دو جلدی، جلد ۱. تهران: مؤسسه انتشارات و چاپ دانشگاه تهران.
3. صادقی، محسن (۱۳۸۴). اصول حقوقی و جایگاه آن در حقوق موضوعه. تهران: نشر میزان.
4. کاتوزیان، ناصر (۱۳۸۱). فلسفه حقوق (منابع حقوق). ج ۲. تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
ب) مقاله
5. محسنی، حسن (۱۳۸۹). فن اداره جریان دادرسی مدنی: سازماندهی دادرسی در قالب اصول دادرسی. مطالعات حقوق خصوصی، ۴۰(۴)، 353-368.
2-5. منابع لاتین
1. Cadiet, L., Normand, J., & Amrani‑Mekki, S. (2013). Théorie générale du procès (2ᵉ éd.). Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
2. Cornu, G. (2007). Vocabulaire juridique (7ᵉ éd.). Paris: PUF /Quadrige.
3. Hart, H. L. A. (1961). The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Philippe, X. (1990). Le contrôle de proportionnalité dans les jurisprudences constitutionnelle et administrative françaises. Paris: Économica.
5. Sime, S. (2015). A practical approach to civil procedure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. Sorabji, J. (2014). English Civil Justice after the Woolf and Jackson Reforms: A Critical Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Van Drooghenbroeck, S. (2001). La proportionnalité dans le droit de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme: Prendre l’idée simple au sérieux. Brussels: Publications des Facultés universitaires Saint-Louis.
8. Vannes, V. (2013). Le droit de grève : Principe de proportionnalité, droit international, européen et national. Bruxelles: Larcier.
9. Zuckerman, A. (2013). Zuckerman on civil procedure: Principles of practice (3e éd.). London: Sweet & Maxwell.
B) Journal Articles
10. Farrow, T. C. W. (2012). Proportionality: A Cultural Revolution. Journal of Civil Litigation and Practice, 1, 151-159.
11. Lacey, N. (2016). The metaphor of proportionality. Journal of Law and Society, 43(1), 27-44.
12. Piché, C. (2009–2010). La proportionnalité procédurale: une perspective comparative. Revue de droit de l’Université de Sherbrooke, 40(2), 551-597.
13. Schlink, B. (2012). Proportionality in constitutional law: Why everywhere but here? Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 22(2), 291-302.
14. Waldron, J. (2006). The rule of international law. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 30, 15-30.
C) Chapters in Edited Volumes
15. Bauer, F. (2023). Proportionality in private law: An analytical framework. In F. Bauer & B. Köhler (Eds.), Proportionality in private law. Mohr Siebeck.
16. Bossuyt, A. (2006). Les principes généraux du droit en droit administratif et droit public, dans la jurisprudence de la Cour de cassation. In S. Gilson (Dir.), Au-delà de la loi? Actualités et évolutions des principes généraux du droit. Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgique: Anthémis.
17. Fullerton, M., & Chen, W. Y. (2024). Summary procedures. In B. Hess, M. Woo, L. Cadiet, S. Menétrey, & E. Vallines García (Eds.), Comparative procedural law and justice (Part XI, Chapter 3).
18. Gardbaum, S. (2017). Positive and horizontal rights: Proportionality’s next frontier or a bridge too far? In V. C. Jackson & M. Tushnet (Eds.), Proportionality. Cambridge University Press.
19. Gaudreault‑DesBiens, J.-F. (2013). Le juge comme agent de migration de canevas de raisonnement entre le droit civil et la common law ? Quelques observations à partir d’évolutions récentes du droit constitutionnel canadien. In G. Otis (Ed.), Le juge et le dialogue des cultures juridiques. Karthala.
20. Kramer, X. E., & Kakiuchi, S. (2016). Relief in small and simple matters in an age of austerity: General report for the XVth World Congress of Procedural Law. In H. Pekcanitez, N. Bolayir, & C. Simil (Eds.), XVth International Association of Procedural Law World Congress. Oniki Levha Yayıncılık.
21. Martens, P. (1992). L’irrésistible ascension du principe de proportionnalité. In Présence du droit public et des droits de l’homme: Mélanges offerts à Jacques Velu.
22. Morvan, P. (2007). Principe. Dans S. Rials & D. Alland (dir.), Dictionnaire de la culture juridique. Paris: Lamy /PUF.
23. Parra-Herrera, N. (2025). Three approaches to proportionality in American legal thought: A genealogy. In F. Bauer & B. Köhler (Eds.), Proportionality in private law. Mohr Siebeck.
24. Petersen, C. S. (2014). A comparative perspective on recent Nordic reforms of civil justice. In L. Ervo & A. Nylund (Eds.), The future of civil litigation: Access to courts and court‑annexed mediation in the Nordic countries. Springer.
25. Tamanaha, B. Z. (2009). A concise guide to the rule of law. In G. Palombella & N. Walker (Eds.), Relocating the rule of law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
26. Uzelac, A. (2015). Evidence and the principle of proportionality: How to get rid of expensive and time‑consuming evidence? In C. H. van Rhee & A. Uzelac (Eds.), Evidence in contemporary civil procedure: Fundamental issues in a comparative perspective. Intersentia.
27. Van Rhee, C. H., & Uzelac, A. (2012). The pursuit of truth in contemporary civil procedure: Revival of accuracy or a new balance in favour of effectiveness? In C. H. van Rhee & A. Uzelac (Eds.), Truth and efficiency in civil litigation: Fundamental aspects of fact-finding and evidence-taking in a comparative context. Intersentia.
28. Voß, W. (2023). Proportionality in civil procedure: A different animal? In F. Bauer & B. Köhler (Eds.), Proportionality in private law. Mohr Siebeck.
D) Thesis
29. Guilmain, A. (2018). Le principe de proportionnalité procédurale à l’aune des technologies de l’information: pour une modernisation en modération de la procédure civile. Doctoral thesis, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne; cotutelle Université de Montréal.
E) Case
30. Campbell v MGN Ltd, UKHL 61, (2005) 1 WLR 3394 (UK).
F) Official Reports
31. Jackson, L. J. (2009). Review of civil litigation costs: Final report (TSO ISBN 9780117064041). The Stationery Office.
32. Woolf, H. (1995). Access to justice: Interim report to the Lord Chancellor on the civil justice system in England and Wales (Lord Chancellor’s Department).
33. Woolf, H. (1996). Access to justice: Final report to the Lord Chancellor on the civil justice system in England and Wales. HMSO.
In Persian and Arabic
A) Books
1. Ansari, M. (2001). Kitāb al‑Makāsib. Qom: Moasseseh‑ye Nashr‑e Eslami. (In Arabic)
2. Dehkhoda, A. A. (2006). Dehkhoda dictionary: Concise dictionary of Dehkhoda (G. Sotoudeh, I. Maleki, & A. Soltani, Eds., Vol. 1). Tehran: Mo’asseseh‑ye Ente sh arat va Chap‑e Daneshgah‑e Tehran. (In Persian)
3. Katouzian, N. (2002). Philosophy of law (Sources of law) (Vol. 2). Tehran: Sherkat‑e Sahami‑ye Enteshar. (In Persian)
4. Sadeghi, M. (2005). Legal principles and their position in positive law. Tehran: Nashr‑e Mizan. (In Persian)
B) Journal Articles
5. Mohseni, H. (2010). Conducting civil proceedings: Organizing litigation within the framework of procedural principles. Motale’at‑e Hoquq‑e Khosusi, 40(4), 353-368. (In Persian)
