نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشآموخته دکتری حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.
2 دانشیار، گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.
3 دانشیار، گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Context & Objective: The principle of the sovereignty of intention and contractual freedom plays a significant role in Iranian positive law, notably referenced in Article 10 of the Iranian Civil Code. The rule "al-'uqūd tābi‘ah lil-quṣūd" (contracts are subject to the intentions) is frequently discussed within Shi'a Islamic jurisprudence as an embodiment of this principle. While this rule appears to reflect the centrality of intention in contract formation, the key issue arises in determining the extent to which the intentions of the contracting parties are recognized within Iranian law as the foundation for the validity of contracts. This study investigates the weight given to the intentions of the parties under Iranian law and explores the perspectives of Sayyid Mir Abd al-Fattah Maraghi (d. 1834), a jurist who advocated for individual freedom in rational contract formation.
Method & Approach: The authors employed a doctrinal approach, analyzing Islamic jurisprudential works alongside Iranian legal doctrine. By examining the views of Maraghi and other jurists, the study delves into the application of the principle of the sovereignty of intention in Shiite jurisprudence and its impact on Iranian legal practices, particularly concerning contract validity and the legal consequences tied to contractual declarations.
Findings: The study found that in the Iranian legal system, the intention of the contracting parties is crucial for determining the legal nature of a contract. However, it is ultimately the intention of the Islamic legislator [Sha're] that underpins the obligation and validity of the contract. Additionally, the research highlighted two primary consequences of this legal framework: first, that the legal consequences of a contract can apply solely based on its declaration, without necessitating an independent intention from the parties involved, and second, that the principle of no harm and the negation of hardship takes precedence over other contractual principles—a viewpoint shared by Maraghi.
Conclusion: The research concludes that while the sovereignty of intention is recognized in Iranian law, it is balanced by the overarching authority of the Islamic legislator's intent. This highlights a nuanced approach to contractual freedom in Iranian jurisprudence, where party intention influences the legal status of contracts but does not solely determine their validity. Maraghi's perspective aligns with this framework, emphasizing the protection of individual freedom within the boundaries set by Islamic law.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)