چکیده:
According to most Islamic jurists, annulment like options is considered to be one of the causes of revocation and discontinuity of the contract. The difference is that revocation enforcement through options is done just by discretion of one party, but the condition for fulfillment of annulment is the agreement of the parties to the contract on dissolution. Considering jurisprudential books and the reasons for annulment permission, the Islamic jurists generally consider the contracts revocable through this way and they prohibit only some of the certain contracts, such as marriage from annulment. The entry of "revocation" into the scope of unilateral pronouncements has raised various issues among Islamic jurists. One of them is" the revocability of unilateral pronouncement". Basically, some of the Islamic jurists still haven't accepted it. Even though, some others have introduced unilateral pronouncements as revocable contracts through option, they have explicitly considered the annulment of unilateral pronouncement prohibited and irresistible or they have been silent on this issue. It seems that this silence is also due to the adoption of the theory" the impossibility of annulment of unilateral pronouncement" and clarity of this idea in their mind. In this study, first, it has been tried to evaluate the theory" the revocability of unilateral pronouncement" and strengthening its positive arguments and then to investigate revocability of unilateral pronouncement through annulment. Based on the findings of this research, the annulment of unilateral pronouncement does not confront with intellectual or legal barrier and it is also possible to use this way to revive the situation before the creation of unilateral pronouncement.
خلاصه ماشینی:
When this word is used along with the term "bay'" (sale), it means the rescission of the sale, and it is used in a case where at least one of the parties to the contract regrets its execution and proposes its rescission, and the other party also accepts their request: "أی وافقه علی نقض البیع و أجابه إلیه" (Ibn Manzur, 1411 AH: Vol. 11, p.
3. Assessing the possibility and legitimacy of Iqalah in unilateral acts (Iqa'at) Although most jurists have accepted the generalization of Iqalah from the contract of sale (bay') to other contracts (Sahib al-Jawahir, 1404 AH: Vol. 24, p.
Therefore, the return of a relationship that has been eliminated as a result of exercising the right of rescission does not face any problem within the scope of constructive relationships governing transactions, and whether the act is a contract (aqd) or a unilateral act (iqaa') cannot cause a flaw in this general rule.
It is clear that revocation of permission, as one of the instances of a unilateral act, can be considered another reason for the possibility of rescinding unilateral acts; because, as previously stated, the rescission of a legal act has no meaning other than its violation and annulment.
The identity of the nature of contracts and unilateral acts in terms of being rescindable (aqalah-pazir) There might exist a perception that a unilateral act, because only one party is involved in its creation is effective, it cannot accept rescission (aqalah), which is dependent on the mutual consent of both parties).
(
, 
, 
)
