Journal Policy

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Submitted manuscripts will be pre-reviewed by the editors, determining whether the manuscripts have conformed to Journal of Private and Commercial Laws submission guidelines. Manuscripts that have conformed to the journals style will be peer-reviewed. Journal of Private and Commercial Law is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal that involves many reviewers of experts in a relevant field of laws. The final decision of manuscript acceptance is solely decided by the editors according to reviewers' comments.

Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are not allowed. Journal of Private and Commercial Law uses Turnitin to screen articles for detecting plagiarism. Detection of overlapping and similar text is used there and so quotations and appropriate citations have to be used whenever required.

Journal of Private and Commercial Law published the only paper strictly following Journal of Private and Commercial Law guidelines and template for the preparation manuscript. All submitted manuscripts are going through a double-blind peer-review process. Those papers are read by editorial members (upon a field of specialization) and will be screened by Managing Editor to meet the necessary criteria of Journal of Private and Commercial Law publication.

Manuscripts will be sent to two reviewers based on their historical experience in reviewing manuscripts or based on their field of specialization.  Journal of Private and Commercial Law has reviewing forms in order to keep the same items reviewed by two reviewers. Then the editorial board makes a decision upon the reviewer's comments or advice. Reviewers give their assessment on originality, clarity of presentation, contribution to the field/science, Journal of Private and Commercial Law has four kinds of decisions:

  1. Accepted, as it is
  2. Accepted by Minor Revisions (let authors revised with stipulated time)
  3. Accepted by Major Revisions (let authors revised with stipulated time)
  4. Rejected (generally, on grounds of the outside of scope and aim, major technical description problems, lack of clarity of presentation)

For checking Plagiarism, Journal of Private and Commercial Law Editorial Board will screen plagiarism with using Turnitin. If it is found plagiarism indication (above 20%), the editorial board will reject the manuscript immediately. Before publishing, it is required to obtain written confirmation from authors in order to acquire copyrights for papers published in the journal. 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Abstracting and Indexing

This title has been indexed by:

Publication Ethics and Malpractices Statement

Journal of Private and Commercial Law is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards for all parties involved in the act of publishing in a peer-reviewed journal: the author, the editor of the journal, the peer reviewer and the publisher Journal of Private and Commercial Law publishing ethics, both internally and externally and we state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement based on Committe of Publication Ethics (COPE) standard. All articles not in accordance with these standards will be removed from the publication at any time even after the publication. In accordance with the code of conduct we will report any cases of suspected plagiarism or duplicate publishing to the relevant authorities. The Journal reserves the right to use plagiarism-detecting software to screen submitted papers at all times. 

EDITOR RESPONSIBILITIES: 

  1. Accountability and Plagiarism: The editors of a peer-reviewed journal are accountable and responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. It is our routine procedure to run all submission through plagiarism detection software. Our acceptance rate for similarity is <20%. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers when making this decision.
  2. Fair play: An editor should evaluate manuscripts for those intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  3. Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

REVIEWER RESPONSIBILITIES:

  1. Reviewers must keep information pertaining to the manuscript confidential. Reviewers must bring to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief any information that may be reason to reject publication of a manuscript. Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts only for their intellectual content.
  2. Each paper is first reviewed by the editor and, if it is judged suitable for this publication, it is then sent to two referees for double blind peer review. Manuscripts will be reviewed by the Editorial Board and at least one independent referee. Decisions regarding the publication of a manuscript will be based on the Board's recommendations. Manuscripts submitted by members of the journal's Editorial Board are subjected to the same review procedure.
  3. The reviewers will evaluate manuscripts based on the content without considering genders, sexual preference, religious belief, citizenship, ethnic and origin, or political philosophy of the authors.
  4. The reviewers need to assure the confidentiality of the information in the manuscript.
  5. The reviewers need to report to the Editor-in-Chief if they find any violation in the manuscript.  
  6. The reviewers need to evaluate the manuscripts as objective as possible and the results of the review present their opinion on the works.
  7. The reviewers who feel unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor-in-Chief and excuse himself from the review process.

AUHTOR RESPONSIBILITIES: 

  1. Reporting standards: Authors should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. Authors should describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others
  2. Originality, plagiarism, and acknowledgement of sources: Authors should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarized, and has not been published elsewhere - fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. If an author has used the work and/or words of others, that this original is been appropriately cited or quoted and accurately reflects individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.
  3. Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
  4. Ethics: Authors should only submit papers only on work that has been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and that complies with all relevant legislation.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
  6. Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  7. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  8. Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.