بررسي اصل آزادي ايقاعات در فقه اماميه و حقوق ايران

The Examination of the Principle of Freedom of One Sided Contracts (Unilateral or Iq’aa) from the View of Imamiyyah Jurisprudence and Law of Iran

در اين مقاله اصل آزادي ايقاعات در فقه اماميه و حقوق ايران بررسي شده است. در پژوهش حاضر با اين پرسش روبه‌روييم كه آيا در حقوق و فقه ما اصل آزادي ايقاعات پذيرفته شده است يا خير و قلمرو نفوذ اراده يك‌جانبه تا كجاست. در پاسخ بايد گفت كه در حوزه حقوق غير مالي اراده يك‌جانبه به ايقاعات معين محدود مي‌شود اما در محدوده حقوق مالي و در عرصه حقوق عيني بايد اصل آزادي ايقاعات را در تملك مباحات جاري دانست، ولي تملك مال غير ويژه اخذ به شفعه است. تمليك يك‌جانبه مال به ديگري نيز مختصِ وصيت است و قاعده‌اي عام نيست. در مقابل، اعراض از حقوق عيني طبق قاعده است. در حقوق ديني نيز پيدايش يك‌طرفه تعهد براي خود و به نفعِ ديگري امكان ندارد و ايجاد تعهد به ضررِ ديگري نيز مختصِ وصايت است ولي ابراي دين مطابق قاعده است. در فرجام جستار پيشنهاد شده است كه قانون‌گذار مدني بابي مستقل را به شرايط اساسي صحت ايقاعات و قواعد عمومي آن‌ها اختصاص دهد و احكام و آثار ايقاعات معين را مشخص سازد.

This paper has studied the principle of freedom in one sided (unilateral) contracts in law of Iran and imamiyyah Jurisprudence. The present research has confronted with this question if the principle of freedom in one sided (unilateral) contracts is accepted by the law of Iran and Islamic jurisprudence or not and to where the realm of free Will effectiveness is. To answer this question, it should be stated that one sided free-will is restricted to identified (specific) ones sided (unilateral) contracts (Iq’aa) in the realm of non-financial rights. But in the scope of financial rights and in the area of objective rights, the principle of freedom in one sided (unilateral) contracts should be carried out in the ownership of actions (neither forbidden nor recommended-mubah), but the ownership of third party property (the ownership of property is for another person) is specified to pre-emption (shufa’a). One sided conveyance (transferring property from one owner to another) is specified to Will (Wasiyyat) and it is not a common rule. In contrast, abandonment (the surrender, relinquishment, disclaimer, or cession of property or of rights) is from of real rights according to the rule. it is impossible the establishment of one sided obligation for himself and for the benefit of the other in personal rights and creating obligation for the loss of the other is specific to guardianship established by will but legal release of obligation Is accorded with the rule. Finally, it is suggested that the civil legislature specifies an independent chapter to the basic provisions of the validity of one sided (unilateral) contracts and common rules and determines rules and definite (identified) effects of one sided (unilateral) contracts. Key words: one sided (unilateral) contract (Iq’aa), bilateral contract (aqd), the freedom in one sided (unilateral) contracts, the freedom of agreements, the guardianship of free Will, conveyance or transfer of property or a title by Will.