The Nature of Mutuality of Obligations in Common Law and its Function in Imamiyyah Jurisprudence and Iranian Law

One of the rules of law which has long been used and invoked in the common law is mutuality of obligations doctrine that the courts have applied to assess the existence or absence of balance in obligations of the parties. Mutuality of obligations doctrine applies in swap obligations and the courts use it for reviewing the existence or absence of balance in obligations at the time of issuance of obliging the performance of obligations in. Therefore, the main challenge of this paper is to examine the nature and consequences of this doctrine in common law and its function in Iranian law. In the end of the present study it is determined that that applying the doctrine of mutuality of obligations is based on numerous foundations such as the equality of the parties in court and the nature of the Swap contract. Although there are some rules such as correlation between the considerations and the right of lien in Islamic jurisprudence and law which are due to the need for confrontation in conclusion and implementation of obligations, there is no objective and comprehensive criterion which recognizes the obligation to perform obligations only in cases where such a possibility exists for the other party. Applying this rule provides a clear criterion for the re -examination of the existence of balance in the contract. moreover, the violation of mutuality of obligations has a wider realm than traditional solutions of Iranian law such as right to lien in such a way that if the parties have abolished their rights to lien or this right is abolished for any other compulsory reason, the court will order to enforcement by the defendant only in case of mutual enforcement ability.