Although the conflict of obligations in jurisprudence and law is considered as a secondary issue and jurisprudence and law is a barrier to prevent such conflicts, at the same time today, conflicting transactions is one of the problems of jurisprudence and law, increasing the volume of cases. Conflicts of recent actions with previous obligations in criminal cases have doubled the need for analysis of the treatment of such conflicts. And the law of remediation has examined the conflict of past obligations and new practices radically, the findings of which are:
1. The term conflict in jurisprudence is not true of the conflict of obligations, but it has been said to be a conflict. Conflict in jurisprudence is mostly related to the conflict of evidence and conflict in law is considered to be related to the conflict of laws.3. Conflict of obligations arising from evidence, laws and litigation documents are placed in the form of jurisprudential and legal conflicts.4. The treatment of the conflict between recent actions and previous obligations has also been analyzed based on the conflict resulting from the mentioned cases. Most conflicts are initial and are treated according to the rules of apparent conflict resolution and antitrust preferences.