Accessories to the object of sale have always been a subject of discussion and debate among jurisprudents and lawyers. Is customary intention a criterion for determining the accessories to the object of sale, or must the very parties to the contract necessarily agree on it, even if only in an implied manner? If the recognition of accessories is left to common usage, is it the rule or an exception to the rule? Can common usage stand alongside other religious proofs and determine the facts under law, or is it necessary for it to be approved and authorized by the Divine Legislator? The present article studies the foundations of customary implied terms in order to respond to these questions. These responses can be quite useful for judges in settling legal cases.
Almasi, N. A. and Tabatabaei, S. A. (2011). Customary Implied Term: A case Study of Article 356 of the Civil Code: Rule or Exception. Journal of Islamic Law Research, 11(2), 189-206. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1065
MLA
Almasi, N. A. , and Tabatabaei, S. A. . "Customary Implied Term: A case Study of Article 356 of the Civil Code: Rule or Exception", Journal of Islamic Law Research, 11, 2, 2011, 189-206. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1065
HARVARD
Almasi, N. A., Tabatabaei, S. A. (2011). 'Customary Implied Term: A case Study of Article 356 of the Civil Code: Rule or Exception', Journal of Islamic Law Research, 11(2), pp. 189-206. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1065
CHICAGO
N. A. Almasi and S. A. Tabatabaei, "Customary Implied Term: A case Study of Article 356 of the Civil Code: Rule or Exception," Journal of Islamic Law Research, 11 2 (2011): 189-206, doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1065
VANCOUVER
Almasi, N. A., Tabatabaei, S. A. Customary Implied Term: A case Study of Article 356 of the Civil Code: Rule or Exception. Journal of Islamic Law Research, 2011; 11(2): 189-206. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1065
)
