سید حسین صفایی

One of the important issues in forced guarantee is the guarantee caused by deception and trickery, which the jurists refer to as the "rule of pride" and based on it, a deceived person who has suffered a loss due to another's deception, is entitled to this possibility. They allow him to approach the cheater and claim compensation for his loss. In Iran's legal books, this issue has not been examined independently, and what is discussed sporadically is based on jurisprudence. In English law, this issue is referred to as fraud and misrepresentation, and it is realized when a two-sided concept is used without sufficient clarity, and the person describing it deliberately makes false statements with the intention of deception. Or he has been careless in the accuracy of his statements The legal rules of both countries show that deception is considered as a cause of civil liability, and the basis of the guarantee judgment resulting from it is deception and arrogance that caused damage without the need for damage in the meaning of the term. be made Of course, in the legal rules of each country, different conditions and bases are considered, such as fraudulent act, loss, causation relationship, knowledge and intent, fault, etc., but damage, fraudulent behavior and causation relationship The main elements of guarantee are in fraud, which is common in the legal rules of both countries, England and Iran.

The Iranian Law and Legal Research Institute, with a research-oriented and development-focused vision, is committed to publishing a series of journals under the "Research and Development" prefix. The first journal in this series, titled the Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law, has already been published. Now, the second journal from this institute, titled Research and Development in Private Law, is being launched. In the Fall 2023 issue of the prior journal (Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law), the concept, objectives, and importance of research and development in various branches of law were extensively discussed, so these points will not be repeated in this note. The new journal, Research and Development in Private Law, is dedicated to exploring emerging academic fields, new theories, innovative laws, policymaking strategies, and evaluations of experiences and achievements in private law. The hope is that these studies will identify new potentials within Iran's legal system, thereby advancing citizens' rights and contributing to improved living conditions within an Iranian-Islamic society. One of the core aims of this journal is to support research and development in new branches of private law. Therefore, the first issue of this journal is specifically devoted to intellectual property (IP). This issue contains scholarly articles and is dedicated to Dr. Saeed Habiba, whose exceptional contributions have significantly advanced intellectual property knowledge within the national academic community.[1] In recognition of Dr. Habiba’s contributions, the content of this academic note is structured as follows. We begin by addressing the background of intellectual property law, touching upon the concepts of "simultaneous conception" (the coincidental and independent arrival at the same intellectual creation by two individuals) and "plagiarism." Following this, we discuss the rapid evolution of knowledge and technology as key factors driving changes in intellectual property law, emphasizing the need for research and development in private law in general and in intellectual property law specifically. We then examine some of the challenges and opportunities brought by these changes in intellectual property law and conclude with a forward-looking analysis of potential scenarios for continued research and development in this field. [1]. 

Nowdays, the doctrine of legitimate expectations is considered as one of the most important bases for identifying contractual and non-contractual rights and obligations. Although in Iran’s legal system and Imami jurisprudence, there are several rules such as the Esalate Erade Zaheri, Ghaede Ghorour, Delalate Fahva and the principle of the Apparent Authority to some extent provide the purpose of protecting legitimate expectations, but the lack of a general rule in this field is noticeable. Based on this rule, whenever the behavior of a person or a public official creates a reasonable belief in the collective mind of the society, this belief is the basis for establishing a recognized right and capable of protection. Therefore, as a prelude to establishing a general rule, the legitimacy of expectations and the permission of trusting to appearances must be proven. In the principles of Islamic jurisprudence, asala al-zohoor has a long history for the permissibility of relying on the appearances of people's words, but there is doubt about the inclusion of the principle in appearance regarding the appearance of people's circumstances and actions, especially due to the lack of explicit presentation of this type of appearances in basic books, challenges proving the doctrine of the legitimate expectations. As a general rule in this context, it can be said that if the possibility of a contradiction, which the appearance of the present entails, is created in the mind of the audience after the action according to the preferred belief, the impression created is valid and the resulting expectation is a legitimate expectation. And it is considered worthy of support, especially where the theologian is in the position of creating meaning and concept in the audience's mind. Among legal theorists, it appears that the theory of legitimate trust was first introduced by Emmanuel Lévy as the foundation and purpose of law. According to Lévy's theory, since the foundation of social relations is based on trust and the collective belief of individuals in society constitutes public trust, the law should serve to ensure and protect legitimate collective beliefs. Therefore, these beliefs are the basis for determining the rights and duties of individuals in society. In this view, Lévy believed that the law should be capable of evolving on its own, and when legitimate collective beliefs form the basis of the law, the law can align with societal changes and progress alongside the evolution of collective beliefs.In Iranian law and Imami jurisprudence, it is evident that while discussions on the philosophy of responsibility are extensively covered in some texts, the necessity of protecting legitimate trust is not explicitly mentioned. Nevertheless, one can find instances in the language of jurists and legal scholars that indicate support for the protection of legitimate trust. For example, *tadlīs* (fraud) and *ghurūr* (deception) are two different ways of compensating the damage suffered by a person whose legitimate trust has been violated. An examination of the cases related to these two principles confirms that they were precisely established with the aim of protecting legitimate trust.The content of the principle of warning (Tahdhir) exempts a person from liability when they have provided the necessary warning to those at risk while engaging in legitimate harmful behavior, even if the injured party fails to understand the warning due to reasons not attributable to the person giving the warning.By examining instances of the principle of protecting legitimate trust, the following definition can be inferred: Whenever the behavior of an individual or public authority creates a reasonable belief in the collective conscience of society, this belief is recognized as a basis for establishing a right that deserves protection. This protection may take the form of either the non-liability of the person holding the belief or the contractual or non-contractual obligations and liabilities of others toward the person holding the belief. In other words, if a person's behavior creates a reliable appearance and another party, relying on this appearance, acts in a way that does not align with reality, then the person who created the appearance is either bound by the appearance they created and must respect the rights of the other party in accordance with that appearance, or they are obligated to compensate for the damages resulting from the discrepancy between the appearance and reality.

In article 20 of the publication, the approaches that the journal intends to follow and the areas and branches of law in which research and development are going to be conducted are explained. One of the areas mentioned in that article was the "technological information impact on the legal system" in general and "judicial law" in particular. This editorialsuggests a specific research collaboration between the judiciary and legal researchers. This collaboration will be carried out through thematic qualitative analysis to identify and promote predominant and strong judicial policies. We will explain how thematic qualitative analysis can be used to identify and promote these predominant and strong judicial policies and how this research can serve as a powerful companion to programs designed and implemented to prevent the multiplicity of judicial policies. For more explanation, the Iranian judicial system is wide in scale and has high capacity in depth. By the width of the system, we mean numerous stages and judicial authorities, such as the prosecutor's office, first and second-class criminal courts, Civil courts, Family courts, some specialized courts, the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court, quasi-judicial commissions, the Administrative Justice Court, etc.

In this editorial, we aim to introduce a legal research area to researchers. This research area raises and proposes multiple research topics for researchers. The core of this research area is the question of the responsibilities arising from the non-realization of the goals and programs approved by the governance system and government officials! In this editorial, while explaining this question as a research need, we specifically focus on the liability arising from the non-realization of the Iran 1404 Vision Document, because the evaluations performed indicate the non-realization of the most important indicators of this important and upstream document. The emphasis on comparative study in response to the aforementioned question is because studying human experience in similar fields can lead to the development of theoretical and related literature to this question. Based on this, first, an explanation is provided about research needs assessment, and we explain the necessity of research in the legal dimensions of the governance system and the responsibilities arising from the non-realization of the goals and programs approved by the governance system.

In this paper, the discussion about the civil liability of minors and mental patients has been discussed in the form of a comparative study, with the descriptive-analytical research method. And this central question has been answered that basically, what criteria should be used to measure the harmful behavior of minors and people with mental disorders?. A look at the history of civil liability clearly indicates that the law of civil liability has always been at a dilemma  in answering this question: On the one hand, emotional, moral, fairness and substantive justice issues require the determination or modification of the civil  liability of these people, and on the other hand, the final goal of the law of civil liability, i.e. restoring the previous situation and compensating for unjustified losses, complex personal explorations, mental and psychological explorations encountered with serious doubts!. These doubts have caused the legal systems to choose different points of view in this regard: Some have taken the side of the loser and defended the rule of objective criteria in the law of civil liability. And some people are also inclined towards supporting the minor and the insane and have adopted the subjective criterion of fault; Despite this, it seems that we should choose a middle approach and use the " Relative objectivity " criterion as a criterion for evaluating the behavior of minors and patients with mental disorders and based on this, proposed a more flexible and disciplined interpretation of "conventional behavior" in Articles 951 to 953 of the Civil Code.

Within the realm of commercial contracts, a specific group of contracts can be classified as permissive contracts. This category includes brokerages, agency contracts, employment contracts, and commercial representation. The rules and consequences associated with permissive contracts have far-reaching implications for legislative processes, court judgments, quasi-judicial bodies, and executive authorities. The authorized status of the obligated party and the presence of a trust description are two crucial factors determining the nature of these contracts. If the fulfillment of the permissive obligation lacks a trust description or occurs outside the boundaries of authentic consent, it constitutes a breach of contract or, at the very least, renders the contract non-binding. The findings of this comparative research reveal that within the legal system of England, such contracts are recognized as forms of agency contracts or representation. In Imamiyyah Jurisprudence, although no specific discussion has emerged regarding commercial permissive contracts due to their novelty, based on the general principles established in Imamiyyah Jurisprudence, these types of commercial transactions can be classified as permissive contracts. In the legal system of Iran, considering the challenges addressed in legal doctrine, there is overall compatibility between commercial permissive contracts, Imamiyyah Jurisprudence, and the legal system of England.

Acomparative study in Iranian and French law has been investigated and reviewed in this article around the contract of assignment and the necessity of drawee (Arabic: محال علیه, assignee)’s consent in order to use the results of the discussion to prepare the general theory of cession of debt and seeking in Shīʿa jurisprudence. The question is, who are the parties to the contract of a bill of exchange and whether it is necessary to obtain the consent of the drawee for the conclusion or effect of the contract of the bill of exchange? Moreover, is it possible to deduce the institution of transfer of religion and cession of debt and novation of debt in a direct manner from this discussion in Shīʿa jurisprudence and civil law and is it possible to analyze the second and third paragraphs of Article 292 Civil Code based on it? We came to the conclusion by a descriptive-analytical research method and by studying jurisprudence texts and legal doctrine that the stronger opinion in Shīʿa jurisprudence and Iranian law is that the consent of drawee (assignee) is necessary for the occurrence of the bill of exchange and he/she is considered as a party to the contract and the death or incapacity (Arabic: حجر) of each of drawer (Arabic: محیل, assignor) or creditor (Arabic: محتال, beneficiary of a draft) or drawee (Arabic: محال علیه, assignee) between offer (Arabic: إیجاب) and the last acceptance (Arabic: قبول) causes the extinction of the validity of the agreement (Arabic: تراضی, mutual consent). In addition, among the rules of bill of exchange and issues which are discussed in jurisprudential texts and civil law can accept the validity of cession of debt and novation directly in Shīʿa jurisprudence and Iranian law. Thus, contrary to what was common in Roman law and old French law, the “active deb” (claim), like tangible assets can be transferred to another even without the consent of the debtor. Also, unlike Roman Law and Old and New French Law (before the 2016 and 2018 reforms), “debt” is separate from obligor and the debtor can transfer the debt to a third party with creditor’s consent by materializing this constructive being which has long been accepted in Shīʿa jurisprudence and finally recognized it after centuries of disagreement and doubt in 2016.

Identifying the right to privacy of individuals as one of the most important human rights is of great importance, and Islam, as the most complete religion, has paid special attention to the necessity of respecting the privacy of individuals, according to its various rulings and orders. Although in Islamic jurisprudence various aspects of privacy have not been dealt with under one title, but it can be claimed that the Islamic Shari'ah has considered aspects of this privacy that can still be discussed in the science of law. Today, with the advance of communication technologies and the expansion of the use of cyberspace, people's privacy is under threat. Therefore, the main question of the article is what are the principles and foundations in jurisprudence and law regarding the protection of people's privacy in cyberspace? In jurisprudence and the legal system of Iran, it has covered strong principles such as the need to respect human dignity, moral values, the rule of dominance, the rule of respect, and avoiding cruelty as common rules for protecting privacy in this field, in order to create the necessary space for growth and flourishing people's talents. In this regard, this research, by presenting the principles of privacy in Islamic jurisprudence and law, along with the territory and examples of privacy violations in cyber space, the strict attention of Sharia law to privacy protection is clarified.

Quick and easy access to the judge is based on the philosophy of "transparency" and the function of "accountability". It is a duty with deep roots in the history, jurisprudence, and organizational culture of Iranian and Islamic law and judiciary that a judge be accessible. Sadly, this well-intentioned task seems to have been forgotten, on the one hand, beneath the layers of results arising from Corona's previous limitations, and on the other hand, among the ambiguous needs of the digital space. Unexpectedly, the organizational procedures and guidelines are intended to destroy this historical value, jurisprudence, and organizational culture completely and replace them with the exact opposite, which is a clear vice. As shown in historical examples, the Great Prophet and Amir al-Mu'minin, peace be upon him, both in their practical behavior advocated easy, rapid, and unimpeded access to judges, and those dignitaries themselves demonstrated similar behavior. We also have a term called "Hajib al-Qazi" in the jurisprudential tradition. According to Islamic jurisprudence, this phenomenon, which is similar to the guardians and gatekeepers of modern courts, is subject to three types of judgment: recommended, abominable, and definitely forbidden. In light of the fact that, according to frequent jurisprudential texts, judges are recommended not to have doormen, guards, or doorkeepers. (Toosi- vol. 8, p. 87) and the presence of a doorman and barrier is abominable for the judge (Najafi - vol. 40, pp. 79-80), nevertheless, when the presence of a doorman prevents access to the judge by the clients and they may be harmed, it is clearly forbidden. (Ibn al-Allameh- vol. 4, p. 310) and a situation such as this is not permitted by jurisprudential tradition. However, in the organizational culture, it has always been seen as a virtue and praiseworthy to have open doors to the court and to have free, easy, quick, and straightforward access to the judge, and there are numerous stories and examples of honorable judges who became legends and have remained in the hearts and minds of the organizational culture. In what direction is this organizational culture heading? What examples of this do we hear? At times, the argument of widespread Corona disease justified the lack of access to the judge and the creation of barriers and guards. In the present day, under the pretext of electronic exchange of information, this lack of access has been accelerated, so that it is no longer considered possible to have free access to the judge. Daily reports from friends and colleagues contain unbelievable statements, which we mention as a lesson in history, to illustrate how a virtue that seems indisputable over time can become the exact opposite. Among these reports are the following: 1- During most office hours, some branches of the Court of Appeals and branches of the Supreme Court lock the doors of the rooms without specifying a time to respond directly to clients. 2- Managers and office staff do not permit clients to enter the courtroom, and if they fail to comply with this task, they are reprimanded by their direct supervisors. 3- It has been reported recently that trial courts deny parties access to the courtroom, even when they appear at the scheduled time. Instead, they give the minutes of the meeting to the office so that the parties may write and sign their contents in the waiting room or in the office and return without seeing a judicial officer and without receiving any oral feedback. 4- There is no question that some judges demonstrate self-sacrifice and people-oriented ethics, and it is worthwhile to acknowledge their efforts. In spite of the rule of statist organizational culture, they remain committed to their professional integrity and defend it to the fullest extent of their ability because they are guardians of professional virtues. As well, we report on the disappearance of a virtue rooted in the history, jurisprudence, tradition, and judicial organization of Iran and Islam, and we recall these forgotten virtues and proclaim with a loud voice that there is a vice instead of a virtue! Are we able to be heard? Is anyone concerned about the potential loss of the virtues of Iran's judicial system? In order to ensure that one day our concerns will be heard, we register them here. By the grace of God Almighty [1]. Emeritus Professor of Tehran University, Tehran, Iran [2] Head of the Iranian Law and Legal Research Institute and former judge of the Supreme Court

Duty to inform is part of lawyer’s obligations required by contract and law. The failure of such duty is considered as professional negligence and so resulted in lawyer’s civil responsibility. The purpose of this paper is to comparative study of lawyer’s duty to inform his/her client and a third party, also to explore the related cases and liability by searching differences and discovering similarities between Iranian and American legal systems and to reveal the importance of issue so it would be useful to legislature for establishing effective legal rules or modifying the law. In this article, the necessity of pre-contract disclosure and lawyer's duty to consistently keep client informed during client-lawyer relationship is achieved through comparative scrutiny of the two legal systems by descriptive analytical approach, with focus in informed consent in American law and client interest in Iranian law. A lawyer duty to inform includes any information affect client consent and decision making regarding the lawyer itself or legal representation. Despite conflict between the duty to warn a third person and the duty of confidentiality, disclosure appears necessary in cases another person is in significant danger posed by client.

Problem-solving research seeks to identify questions and problems that can be proposed and examined pertaining to an organizational issue or social event. This article as problem-solving research seeks to discern and identify legal questions and issues related to the unrest of 1401 in Iran. Identification and definition of these issues and questions provides a favorable ground for legal researchers to deal with the legal aspects of the 1401 unrest in Iran in the form of articles, theses, academic chairs, and even academic treatises. In addition, the results of this research can be useful for policymakers, planners, and legislators. The problem-solving nature of this research led to the writing of this article with the participation of 80 Iranian legal and judicial experts, of which 56 of them agreed to include their names as Co-author, and in this way, the indicator of the "number of authors" involved in the writing of a single article has also set a new record. The tools and methods of data collection in this research were library and case study methods, and the analysis of said data was carried out by the "content analysis" method. In this research, hundreds of questions or legal issues have been identified that can directly be used as subjects for research.

In this article, the conditions and effects of the force majeure in the amendments to the French Civil Code adopted in 2016, in order to use the solutions of the French legislature to eliminate the shortcomings of the Iranian legal system have been studied by descriptive-analytical research method. The main question is what are the conditions and characteristics of the force majeure and what is the criterion for distinguishing them, either personal or relative, and what effect does force majeure have on contracts, contractual obligations and contractual liability? A comparative study of Iranian and French law shows that the inevitability (impossibility of eliminating and repelling the accident) and the unpredictability of the accident, with a kind of relative criterion, and also the impossibility of executing the contract, with an objective criterion, are conditions for the realization of force majeure; But the externality of the accident is not an independent condition and refers to the same impossibility of preventing the accident (not being avoidable). Also, contrary to French law, the Iranian legislature did not anticipate the effects of the force majeure on the contract itself and the contractual obligations, and the effect of force majeure on contractual liability was also incompletely stated, which has led to differences between judicial decisions. Therefore, it is suggested that the legislator, in the form of a Civil Act amendment plan, in Article 227 stipulates the conditions for the realization (characteristics and criteria of distinction) of force majeure and in Article 229, the effects of force majeure on the contract and contractual obligations and compensation for non-implementation or Specify the delay in fulfilling the obligation.

First, a description is given of the decree issued by the Islamic Consultative Assembly regarding the lack of jurisdiction of the Court of Administrative Justice to deal with complaints made concerning decrees made by the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution and the Supreme Council of the Cyberspace. Following that description, and with reference to the negative reactions of research centers, elites, and scholars to this plan, which were ignored by the Islamic Consultative Assembly, a report is presented on the decree issued by the High Supervisory Body of the Expediency Council, rejecting this plan. In conclusion, the aforementioned case is examined and analyzed with the aim of identifying negative consequences and signs of dysfunction in the working of the legislative body. Finally, the importance of identifying a means to prevent the recurrence of these dysfunctions is stressed.

In this paper, the corona pandemic, as force majeure, has been analyzed by comparative study of Iranian and French law using descriptive-analytical research method. The main question is whether the corona pandemic or the actions of governments to deal with it are considered force majeure and exempt the obligor from fulfilling the obligation or paying compensation. In addition, what measures have the Iranian and French legislators devised to protect the parties to the agreement against the harmful effects of the corona crisis? By studying the legal doctrine, jurisprudence, acts and regulations approved in Iranian and French law, and by considering the deadly dangers and extreme fears of the virus, and in particular governments' efforts to curb the coronavirus, such as the closure of many businesses and guilds, closing borders and canceling flights and banning or restricting travel and the similar cases in the two countries, it can be said that unlike other pandemics, the corona pandemic has the potential to be a force majeure, especially during quarantine and government restrictions. But the corona pandemic cannot be considered absolutely and in all cases an example of force majeure; rather, it is subject to force majeure and its effects only in cases where the corona crisis is an external accident, unavoidable and unpredictable. Moreover, the French legislature has taken special measures to deal with corona's destructive effects on contracts, much more urgently and effectively than the Iranian legislature, to protect the obligor. However, the judiciary as well as the legislature, by adding a section to Article 229 of the Civil Code, can use the results of the present study to consider dangerous epidemic diseases (such as the crisis caused by Covid19- and other similar pandemics) as force majeure.

 In this article, the claim initiated by the buyer of a mortgaged property against a seller to oblige him to release a mortgaged property and to draw up a notarial deed in his name is analyzed and revised in the judicial precedent with emphasis on procedural rules.The main question is whether the aforementioned claim is admissible despite the priority of the mortgagor's rights and the binding precedent No. 620 decided by the General Board of the Supreme Court or there is no permission to accept the aforementioned action.Assuming its acceptance, what bases and principles do the procedural rules governing the aforementioned claim in terms of the manner of initiation of a lawsuit, the party to the lawsuit, the manner of enforcement of judgment, and so on follow. Using the descriptive-analytical method and with the aim of establishing correct and consistent judicial precedent, correcting incorrect procedures, and by reviewing various judicial opinions, it is concluded that a claim to oblige a seller to release a mortgage and to draw up a notarial deed in the name of a buyer is not in conflict with the rights of the mortgagee and the content of biding precedent No. 620. This is so since at first the mortgagee's rights are satisfied by the fact that the mortgager repays his debt to him and then mortgage is released. When this is accomplished, the notarial deed is transferred in favor of the buyer.Therefore, there is no need for a mortgagee to be a party to a lawsuit or to issue a judgment to oblige him to release the mortgage. Moreover, enforcement of judgment is subject to the general rules of "compelling a purchaser to fulfill financial obligations".KeyWords: action to compel a mortgagee to release a collateral, action to oblige a seller to draw up a notarial deed, sale of a mortgaged property, enforcement of judgment, judicial precedent

A comparative study in the theory of imprevision after the amendments of French Civil Code in 2016 and comparision with the similar jurisprudence rules in Imamiah jurisprudenceAbstractAlthough in jurisprudence the reference to the theory of Imprevision is relatively limited, but nevertheless some rules and principles of jurisprudence such as the rule of hardship, new swindling and harmlessness in justifying such theories have been cited by legal writers. Although some jurists have equated the harmlessness, hardship and new swindling rules with the theory of Imprevision in French law, a distinction must be made between the above rules and the theory of Imprevision. However, the theory of hardship has enough consistency to resolve the troublesome situation of unpredictability and prevention until the ambiguity is resolved and a new rule is enacted. In other words, judicial modification or revocation of the contract, like the theory of non-contingency after the amendments to the French Civil Code, can be deduced from the rule of hardship.Key Word: theory of Imprevision, harmlessness rule, hardship rule, the theory new swindling

In this article, the effects of the “Void" of the contract as the origin of debt upon assignment contract have been analyzed in view of the Article 733 civil code.  Does the assignment contract become void when a contract related to the origin of the debt becomes void, or does it remain valid and the resulting obligations must be fulfilled? Additionally, with the annulment (becoming void) of the sale contract which is the origin of the debt, to whom should be returned the price obtained by the assignee (the assignor or the third-party assignee), and the third-party assignee may indicate to the assignor or assignee to return the price he paid; and also, to whom should the customer refer for the price (the seller or assignee). Using the descriptive-analytical research method and extensive study of Islamic jurisprudence and the analysis of Article 733 of the civil code, the study concluded that the void of the contract as the origin of debt causes the void of the assignment contract, and the assignee is obligated to return all things obtained illegitimately to the third-party assignee and the third-party assignee can choose whether to refer to the assignor or assignee in returning the price. This ruling applies to not only sales contracts, but any debt that is created through civil contracts or non-contractual events and an assignment is issued, and then it turns out that there was no debt; to begin with, the above rulings will apply.

In Iran, the first sparks of constitutionalism began with a judgement not supported by law. Iranians' eagerness and their need for the judicial decisions supported by law was first reflected in the Amendment to the Constitution. Then it was approved in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic in 1957 and was widely reflected in the texts of various laws and high-level and low-level legal documents. And still, almost 120 years later, one of the serious challenges faced by the judicial system is the rendition of justifiable, well-founded and well-argued decisions. Therefore, a look at the history of this eagerness and abandonment in achieving a well-founded, justifiable and well-argued decision is important and necessary.

Although all jurists are agree on the issue of the wisdom of the legislator, the concept of the legislator’s wisdom needs to be further explored. In this editorial, the issue cannot be explored as it should be. It can only provide an opportunity for researchers and experts to take further steps. The importance of the debate becomes even clearer to us when we consider that our legislator (in Iran) and our legislation system is in a hurry to produce law and regulation: a draft of law presented by some Majlis representatives entitled "protection of the rights of internet users" is one of the newest law that, in a situation where different systems are competing with each other over increasing bandwidth and speeding up the Internet service, have come up with the idea of reducing and blocking the free flow of information in order to protect "users' rights". On the other hand, not only is it often not seen a sign of the legislator's wisdom, but the whole system of hierarchical norms has dealt with the phenomenon of parallel regulation, which needs to be explained more broadly elsewhere.

In this article, the effects of the "dissolution" of the contract as the origin of debt upon assignment contract have been analyzed with the aim of removing ambiguity from Article 733 civil code, emphasizing on Islamic jurisprudence. The main question here is whether with the dissolution of the contract relating to the origin of debt, the assignment contract is also dissolved or the assignment contract remains valid and the resulting obligations must be fulfilled? If either of these two solutions is accepted, what will happened to the price that the customer has paid directly or indirectly (through the third party assignee); That is, does the buyer, with the dissolution of the contract, have to recourse to the seller or to the assignee for returning the price? Also, what will be the status of the third party assignee's debt to buyer, and also what will be the status of the price received by assignee? With the method of descriptive-analytical research and with extensive study in Islamic jurisprudence and analysis of Article 733 civil code, it was concluded that the dissolution of the contract as the origin of debt does not cause the dissolution of the assignment contract, but the assignee takes the price from the third party assignee and the third party assignee has no obligation with respect to the assignor; The customer also refers to the seller fir returning the price.

The present study explores the impact of partial payment of the debt on the release of the pledged assets regarding the legal and economic issues, with an emphasis on the new decree stipulated in Article 19 (a) of the Law on the elimination of barriers to competitive production and promotion of the financial system of the country. The results of the research in our law and Imamiyah jurisprudence show that Article 783 of the Civil Code, following the jurisprudents of the Imamiyah, has accepted the "rule of security agreement insolubility", according to which no part of the bail is released through partial payment of debt. By contrast, Article 19 (a) of the law on the elimination of barriers to competitive production and promotion of the financial system of the country, provided that the manufacturing unit has gotten some debt instruments from the a bank or a financial and credit institution, whether public or private, is subject to the theory of "rule of security agreement solubility" making an exception to the rule of the civil code. In terms of economic analysis, it is also clear that Article 19 (a) of the law on the elimination of barriers to competitive production, in comparison with Article 873 of the Civil Code, can lead to an increase in wealth and realize the efficiency.

The efficiency is, undoubtedly, the one of most importance in the contractual liability systems which, at least in terms of theoretical view, depends on various elements. Despite the types of breach of obligations and the essentials for the institution of contractual liability, the focus of this article is on the institution of damages while the damages resulting from non-performance of contracts are contemplated not the damages in lieu of delayed or partial performances. In Iranian legal system, same as the English system and the international legal instruments, a solution shall also be quested for the possibility of claiming the entire damages resulted by the breach and supporting the Full Compensation Rule. Having done so, the notion which was attempted to be expounded in this article deals with separation of the consequences of termination, as a remedy for breach, from those of damages or claiming the damages ensuing the termination so as the concept of damages in Iranian doctrine be expanded.