Context & Objective: A legal guardian (Vali) possesses the authority to manage the affairs of a ward (Mahjoor) including the disposal or lease (Ijarah) of their estate. Instantaneous transactions executed in the best interests of the ward are binding and the ward holds no right of rescission upon the cessation of legal incapacity (Hajr). However, a significant ambiguity arises concerning continuous contracts that extend beyond the period of incapacity. The primary research question investigates whether a lease encompassing a ward or their property remains binding post-incapacity or if its validity becomes contingent upon the ratification of the newly capacitated individual. Given the silence of the Civil Code of Iran on this specific issue alongside substantial disputes within Islamic jurisprudence and legal doctrine this study aims to systematically elucidate the legal status of such contracts. The background outlines competing doctrinal perspectives comprising absolute validity absolute invalidity temporal bifurcation and the distinction between the lease of property and the lease of the person.
Method & Approach: This study adopts a descriptive and analytical methodology rooted in doctrinal legal research. It undertakes a comprehensive examination and critical evaluation of the diverse theories present within Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) and contemporary legal scholarship. By analyzing the fundamental principles of guardianship and contract law the research assesses the conflicting rationales regarding the extent of a guardian’s authority. The approach juxtaposes the binding nature of lease agreements with the temporal limitations of guardianship to evaluate the legal merits of each proposed theoretical framework.
Findings: The findings reveal a fundamental tension between two legal principles. On one hand the actions of a guardian are deemed equivalent to the actions of the ward and since a lease is a binding contract executed in the best interests of the ward it logically should persist until its stipulated expiration. On the other hand, the authority of the guardian is strictly confined to the period of legal incapacity granting them no jurisdiction over the person or property of a capacitated adult. The critical evaluation of these opposing foundations demonstrates that neither absolute validity nor absolute invalidity provides a legally sound resolution for all types of leases.
Conclusion: The article concludes that the most accurate legal stance aligned with both jurisprudential and statutory foundations requires a strict bifurcation between the lease of the property and the lease of the person. The study establishes that the lease of the estate executed by the guardian remains absolutely valid and binding following the removal of legal incapacity. Conversely the continuation of a lease concerning the person or physical labor of the ward post-incapacity is not automatically binding and its subsequent validity is entirely contingent upon the independent will and ratification of the capacitated individual.