كليدواژه :
قرارداد , فقه اماميه , حقوق فرانسه , جهت , تعهد
چكيده فارسي :
اولين پرسش مطرح‌شده در هر قرارداد آن است كه به چه علت يك رابطۀ حقوقي قراردادي منعقد مي‌شود. دلايل متعددي قابل شمارش است؛ براي مثال، يك مكان را اجاره ميكنيم تا در آنجا سكونت گزينيم يا مواد غذايي را خريداري ميكنيم تا به تأمين نيازهاي اوليه خويش بپردازيم. همچنين ممكن است از خريد يك كالا اين قصد را دنبال كنيم كه آن را به ديگري هديه دهيم يا مكاني را اجاره كنيم تا در مجاورت فردي معيّن سكونت داشته باشيم. دستۀ اول را بهعنوان جهات اوليه و اصلي شناسايي ميكنيم و دومين دسته در قالب جهات شخصي و غيرمستقيم قرار مي‌گيرند. جهت در قانون مدني ايران و فرانسه بهعنوان يكي از شروط در تشكيل ماهيت حقوقي قرارداد آمده است، لكن مفهوم آن مبهم بوده و تأثير آن در مقايسه با ساير شروط، محل سؤال است. در حقوق فرانسه در اصلاحات اخير جهت بهعنوان شروط حذف شده است. در اين جستار با روش توصيفي- تحليلي سعي بر آن شده است تا تأثير اين تحول بر حقوق ايران مورد مطالعه قرار گيرد. به‌خصوص قانون مدني از يك سو الهام‌گرفته از حقوق فرانسه و از سوي ديگر به اصول و مباني فقه اماميه نيز وفادار است و درنهايت اينكه جهت را مي‌توانيم بهعنوان يكي از شروط اساسي در قانون مدني حذف نماييم، ولي جايگاه آن را از باب نفوذ اعمال حقوقي در عرصۀ حقوق قرارداد‌ها در مواد قانوني مورد تأكيد قرار دهيم.
كليدواژه‌ها
چكيده لاتين :
Although legal doctrines have provided a more conceptual sense of direction, the position of direction cannot be ignored as an essential element in the conclusion of a contract. The French case-law has repeatedly emphasized the need for direction. In the event of a continuing contract, the contract shall be terminated if at any stage of the performance of its obligations in order to remove it. Some jurists see the contract as a dangerous tool in civil law. That is, contractual obligations are precisely distinguished from non-contractual obligations and have a different function. Civil liability is based on restoring the current situation in order to restore the situation. In the event that a person inadvertently uses another's property, compensation is the first guarantee of enforcement. However, contractual obligations are primarily about the future and its dynamic power to change the status quo, and accordingly, German jurists refer to the contract as the king of private law, although French civil law refers to it as a law between the parties. He knows. Direction in the field of contract law has been considered as a means of dangerously restricting the contract, and Iranian civil law and former French law have considered the existence of a directive along with other essential requirements. There are two main functions for the legislators of these two countries: First, it is a means of justifying contractual obligations, in other words it explains the cause and why of the obligation, and we do not seek to justify the plaintiff's willingness to conclude the contract but merely to seek his purpose. We are committed. The contractual direction of the exchange must be crystallized in the form of a contractual exchange, and the objective aspect is that each party considers that the recipient has a right to exchange for itself, which would create a relationship between the borrowers and justify the economic equilibrium of the contract. On the other hand, the binding force of the obligations is also based on such an analysis. Alongside the objective aspect, we see in the irreconcilable contract the vague and glaring aspect of the direction, the person pursuing his property to another without receiving the bastard, excluding the undertaking of the subordinate aims, merely acquiring his exemption. We identify it as a direction. Secondly, it is primarily about trading as a factor limiting contractual freedom. The parties have the necessary and complete freedom to conclude contracts and legal relations, but this freedom is limited to the fact that the public interest and order of the community is not impaired.
