The discovery or transference of permission of unauthorized transactions from the perspective of Imamiah jurisprudence and the civil code of Iran

According to the first part of article 190 of the civil code, intention and consent are among the fundamental conditions of validity of any contract and lack of each one would entail the nullity or suspension of the contract. The jurists and lawyers call the contracts formed without the consent of the owner "unauthorized contract" meaning that the contract cannot transmit the possession unless the owner consents to the contract later. Therefore, the jurists and lawyers have offered different ideas as to the effect of such a consent on the precedent contract which can be divided to two main ideas of "discovery" and "transference". The majority of the past jurists following the Islamic sources have supported the discovery theory, while the recent jurists have seen the transference theory more logical. The two ideas are also propounded by the lawyers. Some recent Shi'a jurists have also put forward the theory of "the result of discovery" which can be considered as compromising between the two theories by applying the results of discovery as long as possible while the transference of possession occurs after permission. The author exploring the ideas of the jurists and reflecting them in the doctrine of the lawyers by an analytic-descriptive method, has studied the article 258 of the civil code to explain the effect of permission on the unauthorized contract and spread this effect to the other suspended contracts as like.