Strict Compliance Requirement in a Will: A Comparative Study of Iranian and American Law

The conclusion of certain juridical acts is not merely subject to substantive rules; also some formal conditions are required for that juridical act to be recognized as valid. One of the most common of these acts is a will, the validity of which in most legal systems is also subject to the observance of formal conditions. On this basis, the conclusion of a will is not merely adherent to the willing of the testator, and some formalities have been drawn up to adjust it. In Iranian law, after enactment of the Code on How to Adjust a Testament and Probate Code, and in American law, according to the Wills Act and the court ruling in Pavlinko's case, observance of formal conditions in adjusting the will is undoubtedly necessary and its sanction will be invalidity of will; which is known as strict compliance requirement. However, strict compliance requirement in both legal systems is not immune to opposition, and the desire to deviate from it has always been developed in the mind of a group. Hence, the most important question arising about strict compliance requirement in these two legal systems is whether it is possible to deviate from strict compliance requirement in the will or not? In this article, through the library method, the hypothesis is proved that although paying attention to the functions of strict compliance requirement in the will requires strict compliance requirement as a principle in the will and deviation from it is possible only if the intention of the testator has been correctly established in court, the analysis of Iranian and American law shows that due to the ineffectiveness of alternative theories of strict compliance requirement, the possibility of deviation is ruled out.