A Comparative Study of the Theoretical Foundations of the Unilateral Obligation, with Emphasis on Iranian and English Legal System

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Private law, University of Tehran, Kish international Campus, Iran;

2 Professor, Department of Private law, faculty of law and political Science, University of Tehran, Iran

Abstract

The legitimacy of creating a unilateral obligation is a disputed matter. According to the opponents, non-recognition of such institution in the law, violation of the dignity, guardianship over the obligee and violation of his independence prevent its acceptance. According to the proponents, such institution can be ruled as legitimate according to legal principles and social necessities, such as the rule of will, justice, social realities, donation of unilateral possession, presumption consent, and necessity of facilitating donations. This article, while preferring the views of the proponents, considers the matter as a case beyond law and jurisprudence and related to the philosophy of law. In England, there are various opinions in favor of the legitimacy of this institution. In Iran, most judges have judged it as legitimate. The basis of acceptance in the two countries is the sovereignty and freedom of will and the principle of irrevocable and correctness in the unilateral legal act.

Keywords

References

[1]. ابراهیمی دستگردی، ابراهیم (1388). مقایسه حق عینی و حق دینی، رساله دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده حقوق دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
[2]. باقرزاده، حمید (1392). حقوق مناقصات، جلد اول(مبانی و ماهیت)، تهران: میزان، چ اول.
[3]. جعفری لنگرودی، محمدجعفر (1389). تأثیر اراده در حقوق مدنی، تهران: گنج دانش، چ بیست و هشتم.
[4].ـــــــــ (1383). مبسوط در ترمینولوژی حقوق، جلد اول، تهران: گنج دانش، چ بیست و ششم.
[5]. ـــــــــ (1380)، فلسفه حقوق مدنی، جلد اول، تهران: گنج دانش، چ اول.
[6]. دهخدا،علی اکبر (1383). لغتنامه، ج15، دانشگاه تهران، چ چهل و هشتم،.
[7]. سعیدی، محمدعلی (1387). حق عینی و حق دینی در حقوق ایران و فرانسه، رساله دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده حقوق دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
[8]. شهیدی، مهدی (1380). حقوق مدنی (تشکیل قراردادها و تعهدات)، جلد اول، تهران: مجد، چ ششم.
[9]. صابری، روح الله (1393). مسئولیت ناشی از عیب طراحی و ساخت در قراردادهای پیمانکاری کلید در دست، رساله دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده حقوق دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
[10]. کاتوزیان، ناصر (1390). حقوق مدنی(ایقاع)(نظریه عمومی- ایقاع معین)، تهران: میزان، چ پنجم،.
[11]. ـــــــــ (1382). ستایش قرارداد یا اداره­ی آن، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، تهران، شماره‌ی52، ص11.
[12]. حشمت، احمد (1364هـ ق). نظریه الالتزام فی القانون المصری، مکتبه عبد وهبه.
[13]. سنهوری، عبدالرزاق (1958م). الوسیط فی شرح القانون المدنی، جلد اول، بیروت: دار الاحیاء التراث العربی.
[14]. ـــــــــ (1992م). نظریه العقد، جلد اول، بیروت: دار الاحیاء التراث العربی.
[15]. الحسینی المراغی، السید میرعبدالفتاح، (1429 ه.ق). العناوین، ج 2، موسسه النشر الاسلامی
[16]. طباطبایی یزدی، سید محمدکاظم، حاشیه بر مکاسب
[17]. عاملی، سیدمحمدجواد حسینی، (1326)، مفتاح الکرامه، ج 9، چاپ مصر
[18]. نجفی، شیخ محمدحسن، معروف به صاحب جواهر، جواهر الکلام، ج4، چاپ قم، تهران، در 43 مجلد
[19]. Amy H., Kastely (20016), the Right to Require Performance, Washington Law Review, No. 66.
[20]. Amy, Schmitz (2006-2007), Embracing Unconscionability Safty: Net Function, Alabama law Review, No. 73.
[21]. Angela Swan (2009), English Contract Law, 2th ed, Butterworths, London.
[22]. Angelo, A.H., Pellinger, E. (1992), Unconscionable Contracts: A Comparative Study of the Approaches in England, France, Germany and the United States, Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review 7-1.
[23]. Brigitta, Luger (2004), The Social Side of Contract Law and the New Principle of Fairness, Kluwer Law, Third edition.
[24]. Camilla, R.(,2005), Review of Contracts Law, Same Publication, 5th editions.
[25]. Cartwright, john (2013), Contract Law, second edition, hart Publishing, North America.
[26]. Chantal, Mak (2007), Fundamental Rights in English Contract Law, Kluwer Law International.
[27]. Chitty, Carl (2008),On Contract, Vol. I, 28th, Sweet & Maxwell Limited, London.
[28]. Colmbi. A, Ciacchi (2006), The Constitutionaliztion of English Contract law, Judicial Convergence and Social Justice, European Review of Contract Law, No.2, Vol.2.
[29]. Gareth, Jones & William Goohart (2005), Specific Performance, London, Batter Worth,4 th editions.
[30]. Geoff R Hall (2007), A Study in Reasonable Expectations about Contract involved Duties to fulfil, Sage Publication.
[31]. Hugh, Collins (2005), The Impact of Human Rights Law on Contract Law in England,  No.13, European Business Law Review, University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper.
[32]. Koch, Robert (2005), The concept of Fundamental Breach of contract, Kluwer Publication.
[33]. Mackendrick, Evan (2000), Contract Law, Publisher, Palgrave, Fourth Edition.
[34]. Olha, Cherednychenko ( 2007), Fundamental Rights, Contract Law and the Protection of the Weaker Party, London, European Law Pub.
[35]. Othman, W.A. (2007), The Petroleum Contracts: Past, Present and Future Perspectives, OGEL (Oil, Gas & Energy Law Intelligence), Vol. 5, issue 2, April.
[36]. Shifrin, Seana Valentine (2000), Paternalism, Unconscionability Doctrine and Accommodation, Philosophy & Public Affairs Journal,Volume 29, Issue 3.
[37]. Spector, Horacio (2006), a contractorian approach to unconscionability, Chicago, Kent Law Review, No. 81/1.
[38]. Teeven, Kevin m. (1990), a History of Anglo American Common Law of Contract, 1st edition, Green wood publishing group.
[39]. Waddams, Stephen (2010), Protection of weaker parties in English law, in: Kenny, Mel, Devenney ,James, Fox, Lorna O' Mahony, Unconscionability in European Private Financial Transactions: Protecting the Vulnerable, Cambridge University press.
[40]. Zhou, Qi (2008), An Economic Perspective on Legal Remedies for Unconscionable Contracts, in: University of Sheffield - Faculty of Law.
Jurisprudence the Essentials of the Islamic Law
Volume 53, Issue 2
March 2021
Pages 260-241

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics