The Emergence and Evolution of the Theory of Cause of Obligation in the History of French Law

The theory of the cause of obligation has been one of the most challenging theories in French law in recent centuries.According to this theory, every contract that is concluded by the consent of the parties must have a cause, since every person who undertakes a commitment is looking for a goal to be directly achieved. The goal is called the "cause of obligation". The aforementioned theory originates from Roman law; In Roman law, in order for a contract to be recognized as valid and create an obligation, it must have a cause of obligation that is not illegal or contra bonos mores. The theory of the cause of obligation in Roman law entered French law along with certain conceptual modifications. For example, based on Article 1108 of the French Civil Code, one of the conditions for the validity of a contract was considered to be the lawfulness of its cause. However, this provision faced a lot of criticism from jurists and judicial precedent. Finally, based on Article 1128 of the new Civil Law (2016 amendments), it was replaced by " content which is lawful and certain" and the concept of cause of obligation mentioned in articles 1131 to 1133 of the French Civil Code was completely eliminated. Considering the fact that this theory has also been enshrined in Iranian law and examined by Iranian jurists, examination of its nature, origin and validity can be useful for the Iranian legal community as well.