نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
After signing a contract, particularly a continuous contract, the performance of the contents of the contract may become impossible. In this situation, on the one hand, the principle of contractual obligation requires commitment to the contract; because making an illogical exception to this principle may come to undermine the contractual system. But on the other hand, it is assumed that commitment to the contents and performance of the contract are not possible. The impossibility of the performance will affect the responsibility of the obligator as well as the contract structure; this, under some conditions, may lead to the exemption of the obligator from contract performance and liability. Based on the kind, absoluteness and permanence of the excuse occurred, it is also possible for a contract to be dissolved, annulled, suspended and, at times, modified. If the impossibility is absolute and permanent, there will be two main effects in the Iranian and English law: the obligator will be exempted from performance liability and the contract will be dissolved. However, in other kinds of contract excuses, Iranian and English law have taken different solutions depending on survival or dissolution of the contract. A comparative study will show that the developments of Iranian and English Law have taken the same direction in order to maintain fairness and justice in logical decrease of the scope of absolute contractual liability and in increase of the number of ways to exempt the obligator in case of contract impossibility. Both legal systems have tried to keep, as much as possible, the structure of the contract.
کلیدواژهها English
