خروج موضوعات از قصد قراردادی در حقوق انگلیس و فقه اسلامی: مطالعه تطبیقی تقریبی

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه حقوق، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران.

2 کارشناس ارشد حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.

3 کارشناس ارشد حقوق خصوصی، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

چگونگی ورود شرط به قرارداد کم‌تر مورد توجه حقوقدانان قرار گرفته است. شاید این موضوع بدان خاطر است که صرف امضاء دلالت بر قبول تمام مفاد قرارداد می‌کند. حالی‌که امضاء یک نوع از انواع در برگیرنده‌های شرط است. راه های دیگری نیز در میان است، مانند اطلاع رسانی و سابقه یا دوره معاملاتی. پرسش اصلی این جستار آن است که اولا، چند نحوه برای ورود یک شرط در قرارداد قابل تصور است؟ ثانیا، اگر شرط سنگینی در قرارداد باشد، رویکرد حقوق انگلیس و فقه اسلامی چیست؟ شروط سنگین ممکن است به یکی از سه شیوه گفته شده وارد قرارداد شوند. آنچه حقوق انگلیس با فهمی صحیح از عرف معاملاتی به عنوان یک قاعده تاسیس نموده است، اصلی به نام دست قرمز می‌باشد که فقدان آن در فقه اسلامی کاملا محسوس است. به هرحال مکانیزم فقه برای شروط ساده و سنگین مشابه است و آن قاعده اقدام است که به وسیله امضاء قرارداد توسط متعهد، بدان تمسک جسته می‌شود و فرد متعهد به شرط سنگین می‌شود. این جستار با مطالعه تطبیقی- تقریبی ثابت کرد که اگر شروط سنگین در قرارداد به نحو معقول و دور از ابهام به توجه طرف معامله نرسد امضاء طرف متعهد قابلیت استناد ندارد و مطابق اصل برائت در فقه و قاعده تفسیر علیه انشاء کننده، ابهام به نفع متعهد تفسیر می‌شود. در فقه و حقوق ایران نیز می‌‌توان با توجه به شرط ضمنی موجود، بار اثبات علم متعهد به مفاد شروط سنگین را بر عهده متعهد له دانست. از این رو باب سوء استفاده متعهد له در انشاء قرارداد تا حدی بسته و حسن نیت در تنظیم قرارداد رعایت خواهد شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Non-incorporation of Terms to the Parties’ Contractual Intention in English Law and Islamic Jurisprudence: A Comparative Matching Study

نویسندگان [English]

  • Moosa Akefi Ghaziani 1
  • Seyyed Mustafa Milani 2
  • Vahid Akefi Ghaziani 3
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Payam Noor University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Master of Private Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Master of Private Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The Matter of entering the condition into the contract has received less attention from jurists.  Maybe this is because just signing means accepting all the provisions to make a contract. While the signature is a type of way that includes conditions.  There are other ways, such as notification and history or trading period. The main question of this essay is that, first, How many ways to enter a condition in the contract can be imagined? Secondly, if there is a heavy condition in the contract, what is the approach of English law and Islamic jurisprudence? Onerous terms may be entered into the contract in one of the three ways mentioned.   What English law has established as a rule with a correct understanding of business custom is the principle called the red hand, the absence of which is quite noticeable in Islamic jurisprudence. However, the mechanism of jurisprudence is similar for simple and heavy conditions, and it is the rule of action that is adhered to by signing the contract by the contractor, and the contractor is bound by the condition It gets heavy.This thesis proved with a comparative-approximate study that if the heavy conditions in the contract are not brought to the attention of the contracting party in a reasonable and unambiguous manner, the signature of the contracting party cannot be relied upon, and according to the principle of innocence in jurisprudence and the rule of interpretation against the drafter, ambiguity is in favor of the contracting party. It is interpreted. In Iranian jurisprudence and law, according to the existing implicit condition, the burden of proving the knowledge of the party to the provisions of the heavy conditions can be considered to be on the party. Therefore, the abuse of the contractor in the drafting of the contract will be closed to some extent and good faith will be observed in the preparation of the contract.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • English law
  • Islamic jurisprudence
  • Onerous term
  • Term
  • Volenti non fit injuria principle
-Aghaei, Bahman (1999), Bahman Legal Dictionary, first edition, Tehran: Ganj Danesh(in Persian)
-Ardabili, Ahmad bin Muhammad, Majma al-Fedat al-Burahan fi Sharh Irshad al-Azhan, vol.8, Qom: Jamaat al-Madrasin Houza Ulmia.(in Arabic)
-Ansari, Morteza, Makasab, Volume 6, Qom: Islamic Thought Publications. (in Arabic)
-Beatson, J., Burrows, A. S., & Cartwright, J. (2010). Anson's law of contract (29st ed.)
-Charman, Mary, Contract Law, )2007(, 4th ed, Willian publishing(UK)
-Chapelton v Barry UDC [1940] 1 KB 532
 
-Curtis v Chemical Cleaning and Dyeing Co Ltd [1951] 1 KB
 
-Esfahani, Mohammad Hossein (1997), Marginal on Makasab, vol. 1, first edition, Qom: Al-Mattabah Al-Elamiya (in Arabic)
 
-Feyz Kashani, Mafatih al-Sharai, vol. 3 (in Arabic)
 
-Graw, Stephen, An Introduction to the Law of Contract, (2021) Australia:Thomson Reuters,10th ed
-Grogan v Robin Meredith Plant Hire [1996] CLC 1127
 
-Henry Kendall v William Lillico Ltd [1969] 2 AC 31
 
-Hollier v Rambler Motors (AMC) Ltd [1972] 2 QB 71
 
- Ismaili, Mohsen and Tavakoli Kia (2013), the condition of concentration in Iranian jurisprudence and law, Islamic Law Research Journal, year 12, number 2, pp. 151-190. (in Persian)
 
-J Spurling Ltd v Bradshaw [1956] 1 WLR 461
 
- Katouzian, Nasser (1376), General Rules of Contracts, Volume 3, Tehran: Publishing Company. (in Persian)
- Khoei, Seyyed Abulqasem (1983), Misbah al-Faqaha, vol. 4, Qom: Maktaba Davari (in Arabic)
-Khoei, Seyyed Abulqasem (1999), Misbah al-Faqaha, vol. 6, Najaf: Haidariyya Publishing (in Arabic)
-Khomeini, Seyyed Ruhollah (2001), Al-Bay, Vol. 1, first edition, Tehran: Institute for Organizing and Publishing the Works of Imam Khomeini (in Arabic)
-Kapnoullas, Steve; Clarke, Bruce --- "Incorporation of Unusual or Unreasonable Terms into Contracts: The Red Hand Rule and Signed Documents" [2006] DeakinLawRw 12; 11(2)
-L’Estrange v F Graucob Ltd [1934] 2 KB 394
-Maraghei, Seyyed Mir Abdul Fattah (1997), Titles of Jurisprudence, second edition, Qom: Al-Nashar Islamic Publishing House (in Arabic)
- Mohagheg Damad, Seyyed Mustafa (1986), Rules of Jurisprudence, Volume 1, 12th edition, Tehran: Islamic Sciences Publishing Center. (in Persian)
-Mohammadi, Abolhasan (2007), Jurisprudence Rules, 10th edition, Tehran: Mizan Legal Foundation. (in Persian)
-Mohagheq Hali (1988), Sharia' al-Islam, vol. 2, second edition, Qom: Ismailian Institute (in Arabic)
- Mohagheg Sabzevari (1990), Sharh Manzomeh, Volume 1, Tehran: Nab Publishing (in Arabic)
-Monaghan, Chris, Nicola, Monaghan (2013), Beginning Contract Law, UK: Routledge,
- Naini, Mohammad Hossein, Maniya al-Talib in Hashiya al-Makasab, vol. 1, Qom: Muhammadiyah School (in Arabic)
Naini, Mohammad Hossein, Maniya al-Talib in Hashiyyah al-Makasab, vol. 2, Qom: Muhammadiyah School (in Arabic)
-Neil, Andrews (2011). Contract Law, Cambridge University Press, 1st ed,
- Najafi, Mohammad Hassan (1983), Jawaharlal Kalam, vol. 22, 7th edition, Beirut: Dar Ihiya al-Tarath al-Arabi (in Arabic)
- Najafi, Mohammad Hassan (1983), Jawaharlal Kalam, vol. 23, 7th edition, Beirut: Dar Ihiya al-Tarath al-Arabi. (in Arabic)
-Olley v Marlborough Court Ltd [1949] 1 KB 532
-Oranburg, Seth C Contract Law Rules. (2022),  Cases, and Problems, E-Book Edition, , ISBN 978-1-387-76166-1, N: 12.A (Accessed on 12/1/2022)
-Paul, Richards, Law of Contract, (2009), Pearson, 9th ed, (UK)
-Parker v South Eastern Railway [1877] 2 CPD 416
-Peter Radan, John Gooley, Ilija Vickovich, (2018), Principles of Australian Contract Law Cases and Materials, Australia: LexiNexis Butterworths,1st ed,
-Saunders v Anglia Building Society [1971] AC 1004
- Shahid Thani (1993), Masalak al-Afham, vol. 3, Al-Maarif al-Islamiya Institute (in Arabic)
-Simaei Saraf, Hossein (1998), Implicit Condition in Iranian Laws with a Comparative Study, Waqf of Eternal Heritage, No. 22, 80-89. (in Persian)
-Tabatabaei Yazdi, Seyyed Kazem (1991), Hashiyatol Makasab, vol. 2, fourth edition, Qom: Ismailian (in Arabic)
-Thompson v London, Midland and Scottish Railway [1930] 1 KB 41