Abstract
<p class="a"><span lang="EN-US">After the conclusion of contract its parties are obliged to perform their contract. If one of the contract parties does not enforce it by some reasons, the other party has the right to bind him to perform the contract. In some cases the non-performance of obligation is not based to the denial of obligator. In English Law, an idea under the title of discharge by frustration has been devoted to this issue and other reasons have been enumerated for it. In this between, Sometimes without the performance of contract is unenforceable, the conditions come into existence which the parties purpose of conclusion of contract are affected and the performance of contract for one or two parties become useless. In this case, the performance of contract is not encountered physically and legally with problem, but the parties intention of conclusion of contract is not within reach anymore. This issue has been set forth for discussion under the title of frustration of purpose and it is a part of the theory of discharge by frustration. In Iranian law, such a theory has not been recognized, but considering some articles of the Civil Code including articles 480,527,551 which seem the bases of this theory are rooted in them, one could believe in this theory in Iranian Law. In this article we intended with the use of reliable sources to have a deliberation in the concept and bases of frustration of purpose doctrine in Iranian and English law.</span></p>
Highlights
In English law until 1863, “The Theory of Absolute contracts” dominated (1, p. 322)
Each of the parties, the absolute duty to enforce contracts (2, p. 98) and are run without fault even with the proof of the fact that he even accidents can not be the responsibility of power is impossible CAIRO seeks relief (3, p. 426)
Taylor fight against Caldwell beginning of the process of the Court, citing the implied term theory, the theory of absolute violated the contract
Summary
In English law until 1863, “The Theory of Absolute contracts” dominated (1, p. 322). According to this theory, each of the parties, the absolute duty to enforce contracts (2, p. 98) and are run without fault even with the proof of the fact that he even accidents can not be the responsibility of power is impossible CAIRO seeks relief (3, p. 426). In English law until 1863, “The Theory of Absolute contracts” dominated According to this theory, each of the parties, the absolute duty to enforce contracts Taylor fight against Caldwell beginning of the process of the Court, citing the implied term theory, the theory of absolute violated the contract. Legislator English with the aim of bug fixes included in this theory in 1943, “An Act to amend the disinfection contract law” passed. They express no effect no special textual content of this rule to directly express in sight in this article, we review the theoretical foundations of the concept and doctrine infertility (impossibility of performance) contracts by disproof we aim at Iran and England
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call