چکیده:
This article analyzes the Principles of European Contract Law, UNIDROIT principles, and Iranian law regarding the termination or adaptation of a contract in the face of a fundamental change in circumstances and the creation of a hardship situation. It also examines the solutions and methods accepted in these legal systems to deal with the aforementioned situation. Theoretically, three solutions can be proposed in a hardship situation: 1- The dissolution of the contract due to the impossibility of its execution under the new conditions; 2- Termination by the party for whom the execution of the contract is detrimental; 3- Adaptation of the contract to make it proportionate to the new situation. The Principles of European Contract Law and the UNIDROIT principles consider renegotiation between the parties as the primary solution in the event of hardship and difficulty, and subsequently recognize the termination and adaptation of the contract. Although the theory of hardship has not been explicitly recognized as a general rule in contract law within the Iranian legal system, there are principles, rules, and foundations that could justify the acceptance of the hardship theory in the Iranian legal system. Especially the rule of 'negating hardship' (Nafi al-Usr wal-Haraj), which can be very effective in recognizing the hardship theory and its main solutions, namely adaptation and termination, as a general rule in contract law.
خلاصه ماشینی:
A Comparative Study of the Effect of Hardship (Asr va Haraj) in the Principles of European Contract Law (PECL), UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts, and Iranian Law Seyyed Elhamuddin Sharifi 1 Assistant Professor at Imam Khomeini International University Nahid Safari 2 Master of Private Law Date Received: 98/40/60 Date Approved: 98/70/71 Abstract This article analyzes the subject of the Principles of European Contract Law, UNIDROIT Principles, and Iranian law regarding the rescission or adjustment of a contract in the face of a fundamental change in circumstances and the creation of a hardship (Asr va Haraj) situation.
Keywords: Hardship, Asr va Haraj, Change of Circumstances, Adjustment Introduction Despite the acceptance of the principle of pacta sunt servanda (sanctity of contracts) in all legal systems and the necessity of respecting the consensual terms of the parties, the impact of social and economic events on the contract between the time of conclusion and the time of performance is undeniable.
In fact, considering that in a hardship situation, the transformation of circumstances at the time of conclusion and the difficulty of performing the contract are to such an extent that no prudent person could have predicted them, and the resulting loss is unconventional and unpredictable; all legal systems more or less agree on the issue that ruling for the necessity of the contract in such a situation is unjust, and they cite various foundations to justify it.
(
, 
, 
)
