Comparative Analysis of the Influence of "Consideration" and Reasonable Reliance on the Type of the Contractual Obligations in Iranian and British Laws

Most legal experts believe that contract brings about obligation and for this reason, as long as the contract is valid the parties are required to follow its content. Contrary to the aforementioned view, the study of contracts in Iranian law shows that some contracts (e.g. representation) are not associated with certain obligations rather they are just a token of one’s right to represent someone. Nevertheless, one cannot deny that such contracts as representation, endowment or reward are considered to be binding under a number of conditions. The main challenge of the present essay is identification of the source of bindingness of some contract and the analysis of the type of obligation resulted from the contract. The authors after the comparative evaluation of the extensions of the obligation in Iranian and British laws have concluded that the inclusion of the price in the contract leads to the emergence of obligation of the conclusion and creation of normal confidence on behalf of the parties leads to the obligation of the means for another party. Acceptance of the theories of price and normal confidence in Iranian law will lead to the emergence of a new basis for the bindingness of the contracts and also the creation of a barrier for prevention from the right. In addition to the above results, distinguishing between the obligations of the result and the obligations of the means will be useful in the mechanism of the demonstration of the violation of the contractual obligations.