فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق خصوصی
پیاپی 44 (پاییز 1402)

Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards by the competent court  when the judgment debtor does not comply with the award willingly is the last step in the settlement of a disputes through an agreed arbitration procedure. The recognition of the arbitral award by a court grants the arbitration awards an enforceability likewise the judgement of a courts. Recognition and enforcement of arbitration awards by the courts upscales such awards to an enforceable and binding level as it’s enforceability has been endorsed by the law. Moreover, when an arbitral award has been recognized by the court, then the outstanding case shall enjoy the status of a res judicata award which bars the parties to the dispute to take the case to the court or the arbitral tribunal again. The recognition of arbitral award has been mainly focused in international arbitration and in international legal literature such New York Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958) as well as in ICSID Convention for settlement of disputes between foreign investors and sates. However, less attention has been paid to the step of recognition in national arbitration awards, yet it calls for a closer consideration under the national applicable law of the seat of arbitration or the place of its enforcement. The study of judicial precedents in Iran proves that recognition of an arbitral award is likewise a prerequisite for its enforcement. Under Iranian law an arbitral award could be enforced by the court when it does not contradicting the public policy, mandatory rules of law, and the rules of substantial law  granting/securing  a right. Consequently, when a court order for enforcement of an arbitral award, in fact the court has preliminary recognized its enforceability and its conformity with  these three said criteria. In this way, the recognition of a national arbitral award should be considered as a distinguished step in the process of its enforcement. This paper, by looking to the Iranian court precedent, intends to answer to the questions relating to the legal nature and consequences of recognition of a national arbitral award, as well as explaining the procedural rules applicable to this concept, such as the method and form which should be followed for such a request, the legal nature of the court’s decision on this matter, and whether this decision is subject to appeal or not.  However, it should be noted that, due to lack of an integrated system for record and publishing of court’s judgments in Iran this research has been confined to the available records.Under Iranian court’s practice and precedent, the recognition of an arbitral award may be requested from the competent court by a “request” from the beneficiary party and  it is not necessary to file a “petition” as requested for bringing substantial claims before a court . The court shall deal with such a request as a matter of procedure and not as a matter of substance by checking the procedures followed by the arbitral tribunal. The court may not invite the parties for a hearing session and is not obliged to follow the default rules set out for proceedings in other cases. The decision of the court on the matter of recognition shall be in the form of and “order or decision” by the court, not a judgment, stating the recognition or rejection of the arbitral award. Such a decision may be subject to an appeal like any other decisions of the courts. If the arbitral award has not been recognized by the court, which means in practice the request for its recognition and enforcement has been rejected by the court, the same case cannot be heard by the arbitral tribunal again, but it should be heard by the competent court. However, according to the dominant practice of the courts, the arbitration agreement shall be survived for any other disputes might arise out of the same contract.In the light of judicial policy of Iranian government to pursue people to the out of court settlement of their economic and commercial disputes, in particular by promoting  mediation and arbitration, Iranian courts have recently shown more tendency to support and help in recognition and enforcement of national arbitration awards. This approach has been demonstrated in the court decisions and judicial precedent referred to in this paper. In brief, the importance of  stage of recognition of an arbitral award should not be broadly interpreted by the courts to jeopardies the said policy,  promotion of arbitration and enforceability of the arbitral awards.

If the guarantee contract is separated in a general division into the guarantee of transfer of Dhimmah and the guarantee as a tool to give credit to the obligee, the guarantee which is customary in commercial documents is the second part of the above division. The holder of the commercial document wants to introduce a guarantor while remaining the obligation and responsibility of the person who is the guarantor, in order to increase the strength and validity of the document and to raise his collective conscience in paying the amount of the commercial document. Therefore, the main question of the current research is that in the guarantee of commercial documents, is it engaged in the Dhimmah or responsibility? What effects will this detail have on the extent of the owner's rights? After researching and studying the works of jurists and jurists, and using a descriptive-analytical method, the authors came to the conclusion that in the guarantee of commercial documents, unlike the civil guarantee, the obligation to pay the amount of the document is placed on the guarantor, and such a view is also based on It increases the credibility of the commercial document and affects the rights of the holder.According to the nature of the issue of guarantee in commercial documents, i.e. the substitution of responsibility for the Dhimmah, after the occurrence of the guarantee, the guarantor is independently responsible for paying the amount to the holder of the commercial document without his obligation being subordinate to the Dhimmah of the main debtor.After the conclusion of the guarantee in the commercial document, if it is determined that the obligation of the main debtor was invalid during the issuance or transfer of the commercial document due to reasons such as forgery of the signature or lack of capacity, and for this reason, the debtor on the date of the document, because of the forgery his signature or lack of legal capacity, raises objections and refuses to pay, it must be said that regarding fake signature and lack of legal capacity, there is no discussion about the obligations of the holder; Rather, the discussion is about the commitment itself, because the commitment is the guarantor of an independent commitment. The subordination of guarantor's guarantee in commercial documents is not related to the principle of the obligation itself and it is related to the duties and legal conditions of the demand, which if the holder of the commercial document does not comply with the formalities of the demand for the document's payment within the specified period, he cannot, in terms of the commercial document, refer to the guarantor, but the fault of the holder has nothing to do with the independence of the guarantor's obligation in front of the principal debtor. In fact, in this research, guarantee is in a sense other than the concept of transfer and attachment. Because in the two concepts of transferring or attachment, the subject of the guarantee is the Dhimmah and a function of the debtor's Dhimmah, but in the guarantee of commercial documents, what is important is the independence of the guarantor's responsibility in dealing with the holder of the commercial document.The limits of the guarantor's responsibility (which include: the guarantor's relationship with the debtor; the relationship of multiple guarantors with the debtor; the relationship between multiple guarantors; Condition of mortgaged property; Collapse of debt obligation; Invalidation of debtor's obligation; Death of guarantor in relation to holder), the scope of the obligations of the officials of the commercial document towards the guarantor, the scope of the law (Statute) governing commercial documents, and the scope of defenses that cannot be cited against the guarantor (which in part consists of (1) irrefutable objections related to the will, which include the objection of forging the debtor's signature; Debtor's lack of legal capacity; forgery in the document after the signature of the debtor and guarantor; The problem of signing the document by the debtor's representative lacks authority, and in another part, it consists of (2) objections that cannot be relied on other than the will, that is, the guarantor's substitution of the debtor, as well as compliance with the deadlines for protesting and filing a lawsuit) will be the influencing factors in this connection

Despite the existence of many rules regarding liability for causing damage to another in Islamic law and the extensive fiqh doctrine in this regard, it has not developed into an independent branch of legal studies and laws within Islamic law. However, the law of Torts is recognized as an original branch of law in modern Iranian law. Influenced by modern French and Roman-German tort law doctrine, Iranian legal doctrine has established general rules and theories of tort law that can be applied to all aspects of causing harm to others. This approach differs from the approach taken by faqihs (Islamic jurists) towards torts, which form the basis of modern Iranian law. According to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, all rules of Iranian law should be in accordance with Shiite fiqh. Shiite fiqh applies different principles to different torts, and there is no general rule or principle applicable to all torts. Due to the influence and supreme position of fiqh in modern Iranian law, these differing approaches have led to significant misunderstandings in modern Iranian Tort law. It seems that the most suitable and efficient approach for Iranian tort doctrine is to move away from the idea of unified tort law and consider this area of law as diverse, where different general rules are applied based on the nature of the specific tort.In fact, according to modern Iranian doctrine, all torts are based on three elements: Damage, Act of harm to another, and Causation. The doctrine discusses each element independently. Regarding Damage, the doctrine presents different types of damages: physical damage to property, financial and economic losses, personal injury, moral damage, etc. If the damage suffered by the claimant is recognized as reparable under tort law, the element of damage is satisfied. The doctrine then considers different ways in which civil liability can be established, such as negligence, personal acts, vicarious liability, traffic accidents, malpractice, and more. Finally, the doctrine addresses causation as a necessary condition for civil liability. When all three elements and their respective conditions discussed in separate parts are met, there will be a liability to compensate the victim by making payment for the damages. The doctrine then proceeds to explain how damages should be compensated. Generally, the compensation principle is presented as a golden rule applicable to all forms and types of damages: the tortfeasor is liable to fully compensate for the damage suffered by the victim without making any profit.Considering tort law as a unified concept, the argument about the foundation of tort law (Negligence or Strict liability) has been presented as a unique principle applicable to all kinds of torts, damages, and acts that engage civil liability. However, this approach does not align with actual Iranian law based on Shiite fiqh rules. The conditions and effects of tort law differ depending on the nature of the damage, and the compensation rules vary accordingly. For instance, in cases of damage to properties, civil liability is established when physical damage to property is caused by a tortfeasor, regardless of whether negligence was involved or not. In this area, there is no distinction between intentional and unintentional harmful acts, and strict liability is recognized as the foundation of tort law. On the other hand, the conditions for pure economic or financial loss are different. These damages are not considered as engaging civil liability unless they are caused by a criminal act (intentional malicious act). The compensation principle applies to all kinds of property damages.The conditions for engaging civil liability for personal injury differ from those for property damage. Civil liability to compensate the victim with monetary payment is primarily established for unintentional acts. In cases of intentional harm, there is no civil liability, and the tortfeasor is subject to retaliation as a crime. When civil liability is recognized, similar to property damages, torts are based on strict liability. The amount of damages for any bodily injury is determined by law, and the compensation principle does not apply in this field.Regarding moral damages, the conditions for civil liability are different from other types of damages. Traditional law did not anticipate civil liability for moral damages, considering harmful acts as crimes punishable by appropriate punishment. However, in recent criminal procedure laws, civil liability alongside criminal punishment has been recognized in relation to moral damages. Although civil liability for moral damages is provided for by law, it appears that the nature of liability remains punitive for the tortfeasor. The deterrence aspect of civil liability is essential in determining damages, with the amount of money determined primarily based on the intention and malice of the harmful act and its impact on the victim. Consequently, the compensation principle does not apply in cases of moral damages, and damages are determined more by considering the circumstances of the harmful act rather than solely focusing on the harm itself.The conditions, elements, and effects of other areas of tort law such as Nuisance and Trespass differ significantly from those mentioned above, as discussed in both Fiqh's (Islamic jurisprudence) and legal Iranian doctrine.Considering all these differing conditions, elements, and remedies in governing Iranian Tort law, it becomes evident that there is no singular logic of tort in Iran; instead, there are multiple torts. The modern doctrine that follows a unified logic and approach to torts makes a significant mistake in understanding the rule of law and often leads to uncomfortable suggestions for its development. A better way to understand the applicable rules and propose new ones is to study Iranian tort law according to a multiple theory that aligns more with traditional Iranian law and Shiite fiqh rather than following the logic of tort law in French civil law or Roman-German approaches.

In the era of rapid technological progress, companies which are important and influential pillars in society, cannot continue their existence with the same old slow methods, commensurate with the speed of impact of technology, especially smart technologies on society, and they should think about using the new and more agile ways of directing the corporation. As the working environment of companies has become more complex, which is caused by the need to process large amounts of information and data and make faster decisions, and on the other hand, scandals caused by the improper performance of company directors, Trust in directors has been weakened. Restoring this trust requires the selection of directors who are far from personal interests and bias and perform their duties with enough loyalty and care. In such a situation, the characteristics of artificial intelligence have attracted the attention of company directors and corporate law experts to the possibility of using it as a director of commercial companies, and in scientific circles, the question of whether AI can be used as a director in the economic and social sectors, especially in commercial companies has become a hot debate. However, the entry of artificial intelligence into the board of directors faces challenges that mostly arise from the autonomy and different characteristics of autonomous artificial intelligence from the technologies before it. The competence to accept the position and how to perform the fiduciary duties and obligations of directors, as well as identifying the regime of responsibility, are the most important challenges in choosing artificial intelligence as a director. The approach and purpose of the article is to explain the competence and the possibility of performing the duties and obligations of directors by artificial intelligence and to identify the efficient responsibility regime, to the extent of proving the possibility of becoming a director. In this regard and in the upcoming article, by studying and reviewing the opinions of artificial intelligence experts and lawyers, it has been compared the performance and characteristics of artificial intelligence and human directors and identified the capabilities of artificial intelligence in the position of a member of the company's board of directors. Regarding the eligibility to accept the position of directorship, it can be said that artificial intelligence, like humans, whose natural characteristics enable them to perform the actions of a representative, has the practical ability to become a director and perform duties as a representative of the company and can adjust its performance to achieve a clear goal that is the company's goal, in a way that we can say it intends. Although artificial intelligence has the practical ability to represent the company, but in order to become a director, only practical ability is not enough and there must be a legislative prescription. In this regard, it is necessary for the domestic legislators and international institutions, considering the capabilities and characteristics of artificial intelligence, to pass laws in order to identify the legal competence for it. Regarding the performance of duties and obligations of directors, due to the characteristics of artificial intelligence, including autonomy, logic, creativity and the ability to make decisions very quickly in complex and difficult situations and process a large amount of data and information, without human intervention, Artificial intelligence has the possibility to make decisions as a director and perform the tasks of directors. The authors' point of view is that with the legal design and coding of artificial intelligence, based on the established standards of company law regarding the duties of directors, artificial intelligence can fulfill the fiduciary duties of directors, away from conflicts of interest and bias, and with sufficient transparency and care. Regarding responsibility, although this technology is new and rapidly growing, most of the currently accepted principles and laws regarding responsibility are still applicable and there is no need to adopt a new approach to responsibility. However, considering the speed of artificial intelligence development, a responsibility regime must be described and implemented that does not lag behind the growth of technology and can act quickly in order to compensate for the damages. On the other hand, considering the risks that identifying any personality for AI will bring, an approach should be taken in the area of responsibility that always the developer or the company using AI as a director is accountable for the actions of artificial intelligence. It seems that a combination of legal regime and compensatory regime can solve the problem of responsibility. In the legal regime, responsibility instead of artificial intelligence and during judicial proceedings is attributed to the developer or company using AI as director, and in the compensation regime, losses are paid through compulsory insurance or a compensation fund or both. The compensatory liability regime increases the speed of compensation because the problems and slowness of the legal regime do not occur, and ensures the damages without entering into the judicial process. Finally, given the topics discussed in this article, AI has important capabilities that make it a good option to be a director. This approach is especially important for countries facing aging populations, migration of directors to more advanced countries or facing cruel sanctions from other countries. Therefore, the legislator should make the necessary regulations to allow companies and The community can benefit from the artificial intelligence as a member of the board of directors.

Today, international arbitration is considered as one of the most efficient methods of resolving disputes in foreign trade, which is considered a more efficient option for managing foreign trade disputes in many ways compared to national courts. In relation to the investigation of the nature of international commercial arbitration, several theories have been proposed, one of the most important and certainly the most challenging of them is the theory of arbitration independence. In this research, we will examine many aspects of this theory and how it works in foreign trade. Different arbitral legal theories have different views on the autonomy of arbitration, with which they usually refer to its independence from national legal orders. Based on autonomous theory, the arbitrator is not forced to consider specific parochial requirements of each State’s public policy, but he only must consider the main rules which are arising out of the international community. Arbitration is actually an institution whose main purpose is to serve the community of international businessmen, for this reason, it should not be used to promote the interests or fairness of the national governments related to arbitration, regardless of the country of the seat of arbitration or the country where the arbitration award is executed. Based on this point of view, any intervention of national courts that is against the assumed will of the contracting parties will actually reduce the efficiency of the arbitration institution in foreign trade, because practically, by choosing an arbitration institution, individuals want to free themselves from the constraints of national laws and not be under the rule of any specific national legal system. Proponents of autonomous theory, believe that the involvement of courts and national laws in the process of international commercial arbitration reduces the usefulness of the arbitration institution, because on the one hand, national laws do not have the ability to properly manage disputes in international trade and on the other hand, the intervention of the national court can make the arbitration process slow and complicated and therefore ineffective and finally, it will reduce the usefulness of the arbitration institution for the merchants. According to this view which has been approved by some national legal systems such as French law, basically international arbitration has a transnational nature and for this reason, the arbitration award issued in a case is not related to any national legal order and in fact has an international character. According to this view today, we are witnessing a new arbitration system in the international arbitration community which shows a new private order, above any national legal system that instead of relying on customs and national norms it is evolving based on the transnational principles and rules of international arbitration. In the view of supporters of independence theory, this is the new approach that will only help to ensure the efficiency of arbitration in foreign trade. Because this approach is completely based on the principle of independence and sovereignty of the contracting party's will in international commercial arbitration which emphasizes the spontaneous and non-governmental nature of arbitration in accordance with transnational conditions of international business in foreign trade, on the basis of which the origin of arbitration rules and regulations is independent of all national legal systems, and in fact, it is the arbitration agreement that is of primary importance in the arbitration process, not the law of the seat of arbitration. The material presented in this research shows that, not only theoretically but also practically, national courts in different countries in line with the common practice in foreign trade tend to acknowledge the independent nature of international commercial arbitration. For this reason, today, along with the national legal systems, we are witnessing a new legal system called the legal system of arbitration, whose principles and rules are based on the principles and procedure of international arbitration beyond referring to any specific legal system of a country. This new legal order with its self-regulation feature emphasizes the non-national nature of arbitration in foreign trade and as it will be analyzed in this research, it brings important results which in practice cause the arbitration institution to be more efficient for the international business community and it will also cause the maintenance and promotion of the advantages of arbitration as an effective dispute resolution method for businessmen as private actors in cross-border trade.

Formalism in law has generally been manifested in three positions that are completely different from each other. The first type of formalism is formalism in the realm of legal rule, which is used from the topics of Law philosophy and the concept of validity of legal rule based on formal criteria, regardless of its efficiency and content evaluation. In other words, the legal rule that has gone through the necessary formalities is respected, even if it is not efficient, or it has ignored the fundamentals and basic factors of law such as: economy, culture, and the like. Another type of formalism is in the realm of legal reasoning and is considered one of the topics of law logic and is used to emphasize the wording and form of expressions, even in conflict or at least, ignoring the spirit of the law. In this way, legal reasoning is actually reduced to formal logic or mathematical logic. Its function is to require the courts to understand the text of the legal article and make logical inferences from the legal article, for this reason, it is sometimes called mechanical legal theory. The third type of formalism is dedicated to the realm of legal acts. This type of formalism, which is the subject of this research, can be presented in interaction with the will of individuals, which to the concept of the requirement of certain exclusive and binding forms in legal acts and the regulation and issuance of documents, and the lack of freedom in the form of legal acts in creating, transferring and the guarantee of commercial documents is contrary to the originality of consent or even the principle of freedom of expression of will.Commercial documents in a special sense in terms of the role they have in the economic relations of individuals, especially merchants, follow certain systems and have certain characteristics. But the most basic feature of these documents is their formality. In the sense that the existence of intention and declaration in the creation, transfer, guarantee, and even payment of commercial documents although necessary, is not sufficient, but the observance and application of the form is relevant and has consequences on it. In fact, the legal form is dependent on the will and is understood in interaction with it and it is: "an external and tangible element that discovers, completes, proves, supports or directs the inner will or replaces it." which is relevant in the realm of legal actions, on this basis, if the will is assumed to mean the creation, change, transfer or cancellation of a right or legal status, the discussion of the form in legal events will not be relevant, because the form in legal events is an empirical manifestation in their sensible face. Although this form can be effective in law, this form of influence has a philosophical basis and cannot be called a legal form. Special attention and special credit to the form in commercial documents are often the initiatives of merchants and have evolved throughout history and have been approved by the legislator, jurisprudence and legal doctrine in international conventions and different countries. Contrary to other branches of private law, including contract law, and the validity of the principle of the sovereignty of the will as an indisputable principle and a symbol of the growth and maturity of private law, basically, formalism causes slowness and sometimes complexity in the contractual and economic relations of individuals, especially merchants, while, considering the philosophy of the separation of commercial documents and also the basis of creating these documents, the appreciation of formalism in this branch of private law is based on speed, ease and reliability in commercial relations. On the same basis, the idea of replacing the commercial document with a banknote as a container of money (not money itself) is one of the important reasons and foundations for the creation and use of commercial documents, which has a close relationship with the general economic order, with the explanation that money is a form of credit resulting from the power and authority of the government, which may be poured into any format, whether it is a banknote, a credit card, a check, or digital currency. Therefore, commercial documents are not based on the basis of replacing that credit essence (money), but on the basis of being recognized as a container of money and a substitute for banknotes, which is the most obvious example of a container of money. This article tried, different from the researches, to analyze the concept and ratio of formalism interaction with will and its foundations in commercial documents.

Today, online stores sell goods and services through online contracts, exchanging emails with the other party, or filling out a specific form on the website by one party. Online contracts may be executed by presenting the terms of the contract to one party and then asking the applicant to click on the words "I agree" or something similar. The number of consumers who use online platforms to fulfill their shopping needs has increased, and online stores have responsibilities for the intermediary role and the platform they provide for online buying and selling. From the legal point of view, two types of contractual or non-contractual responsibilities can be considered for these stores. Currently, these types of internet businesses are very popular among users, but in any case, we should look for a space to increase the security of this type of service and secure it, while taking care of and protecting consumer rights; because at present, with the very wide growth of this type of websites and online stores in different fields, we have witnessed the provision of services in the fields of sports, culture and leisure, electronic devices such as audio and visual devices, household, personal and office, real estate and land, vehicles, services and training, supplies and business, and even recruitment and employment or expression of job opportunities, etc. Since online platforms often act as "gateways to control and limit interactions in a system", the first question is whether online platforms and online stores can still be considered simply as intermediaries or should they be suppliers. The second question is whether platforms, as dominant channels in the market, may be held liable to their customers for infringements caused primarily by platform suppliers. Finally, the third question is whether there is a necessary connection between the first and second questions, namely that the platform operator may be held liable to its customers while it may not be treated as a mere intermediary, it may be treated as a supplier of goods and services provided by Platform Providers. Regarding the activity of online stores and their responsibility for their actions or others, it cannot be assumed that they are not absolutely responsible. The important issue is that in online shopping, the buyer makes a transaction that the seller has not seen closely, therefore, the necessity of such purchases, due to its nature, requires more support from the buyer. Because in such transactions, the buyer does not have detailed information about the seller of the goods, their credit, and the transaction, and the burden of the purchase risk is on the shoulders of the buyer. For this reason, as well as for the specialization of the subject and its great application and importance, in this research, an attempt will be made to examine the civil liability of online stores in the laws of Iran and the European Union. In relation to the foundations of civil responsibility of online stores, the theory of fault should be accepted as the main basis of civil responsibility in the laws of Iran and the European Union. In fact, where the providers of their Internet services and goods commit harmful acts, their liability is still based on fault. However, regarding the responsibility of internet sellers, you can also refer to other bases. The important thing about online stores is that concluding a sales contract through the internet in this category of stores should not create doubt that online stores are not subject to the general rules of civil liability. On the contrary, it should be stated that such stores are subject to general rules regarding civil liability rules; because buying or selling through online stores differs from traditional contracts in only a few specific cases; the most important of which is the method of concluding a contract. In other words, except for a few minor cases, in other cases, buying from an online store is not much different from buying from a real store; therefore, in relation to the civil liability of online stores, two types of liability can be realized, contractual and non-contractual liability. This type of separation in civil liability has been accepted both in the civil law of Iran and in the civil law of the European Union. On the other hand, in order to realize the civil liability of online stores in two areas of contractual and non-contractual liability, certain conditions are necessary. So in the field of contractual liability, the existence of a valid contract, breach of contract, and the existence of damage caused by the breach of contract are necessary, and in the field of non-contractual liability of the online store, the occurrence of loss, harmful action and the relationship of causation is necessary. It is suggested that cyberspace and internet stores are very suitable for millions of jobs. On the other hand, the Internet is a useful tool for marketing various services. In this regard, the creation of up-to-date and applicable laws as well as the amendment of existing laws are more important than ever. For this reason, it is suggested that, especially in Iranian law, laws in the field of online stores should be formulated in a specific way, and in these laws, the civil liability of this type of store should be determined clearly, inspired by the principles of civil responsibility and not limited to accepting one of the opinions and principles. Laws that, in addition to preventing the occurrence of computer crimes, should provide the opportunity for legal internet businesses to operate and grow, and this means that the laws are fair. In addition to the definition of platforms, the law that is developed for this purpose should include the providers and users of the internet platform for the purpose of electronic commerce, the law that is formulated for this purpose must state the criteria and criteria accepted in the legal analysis, of course, a mechanism for the purpose of floating the bon and the ability to generalize the criteria. Claims between parties (both platform, supplier, and user) should be considered. Also, the cases where the rules related to transactions do not respond to the new needs are written and govern the relations of the parties.

In the basics of contract law, the principle is that the parties to the contract are required to fulfill their obligations and any change or withdrawal from the contract requires the agreement of the parties or the existence of one of the legal termination cases. Despite the fact that contracts are binding in some cases, the obligee may have the right to terminate the contract without the obligee's agreement, in order to avoid undue damages caused by the obligee's breach of contract. This right is called the right of initial termination of the contract. The right of early termination of the contract is a right that exists for the obligor without the prior obligation of the obligee to perform the obligation and obligate it to perform the same contract. This right is of special importance for the obligee because it gives him the right to waive his contract and release his contractual responsibilities if necessary. Iran's civil law is silent on the issue of termination for breach of contract, and according to Imami jurisprudence, the principle is that the right to terminate the contract is given to the obligee only with the agreement of the parties or the existence of one of the legal cases of termination. However, some jurisprudents, in certain cases, have believed in granting the right to early termination of the contract to the obligee, including the cases where the termination is justified, the following can be mentioned: if the obligee fulfills his obligation in a way to put the obligee at risk or if the obligee has a long-term delay in fulfilling his obligation. Among the jurists of Imamiyyah, there is no unanimous ruling on the execution of obligations or having the right to terminate, and in Iranian law, granting the right to early termination of the contract to the obligor, in order to protect his rights and interests and to reduce the amount of damage and to have proof of the negation of the damage is on the principle of necessity. It can be proved in some ways. For example, if the concluded contract contradicts the laws and regulations of the country, the obligee can have the right to terminate the contract early. According to international documents such as the Convention on the International Sale of Goods, the principles of the law of international commercial contracts, as well as the principles of the law of European contracts, the right of initial termination is accepted in the event of a fundamental breach of the main obligations. In the common legal system, the right to terminate the performance guarantee is a breach of contractual obligations, and the right to early termination of the contract to the obligee may be less seen due to the limitations that exist in these systems. In this system, due to the existence of strict laws in the case of keeping contractual obligations and adhering to them, the right of early termination of the contract to the obligee is less than in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law. In the Roman-Germanic legal system, the right of early termination of the contract to the obligee depends on the terms of the contract and legal laws. The country may be restricted. In this legal system, more attention is paid to maintaining contractual obligations and communication with the obligee, and for this reason, the obligee's right to early termination of the contract is less than Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law. Paying attention to the comparative study of the feasibility of granting the right to early termination of the contract to the obligor, in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law and common law and Roman-Germanic legal systems, it can be concluded that in these systems, the right of early termination of the contract to the obligee depending on the conditions of the contract and the legal laws of the country, they may have a more limited scope of implementation. In this research, the right of initial termination of the contract in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law is compared to the common law and Roman-German legal systems with a case study of the laws of England as a subordinate country. The legal system of common law and France and Germany, two countries subject to the Roman-German legal system, have been comparatively examined. In English law, the right of initial termination is accepted in case of violation of obligations or the main conditions, and in French law, initial termination is also accepted in cases of violation. A serious obligation is subject to the obligee's notice, warning, and the expiration of the additional period. In German law, the exercise of the right of initial termination for the obligee is subject to the passage of time. A group has considered that the obligee is entitled to force the obligee to perform just by breaching the contract, which is the famous opinion of Imamiyyah jurists. Another group has preferred the right of rescission over coercion, and another group of jurists, like Imam Khomeini (may God bless him and grant him peace), have considered the obligee as benevolent in the acts of rescission or coercion, believing that the right of rescission and the right of coercion are the same. Various approaches have been adopted in Iran's laws, although the judicial procedure in this field is quite clear and gives priority to enforcement over termination of the contract.