Transfer of Nonexistent Property and its Effects in lease contract in Emamieh Jurisprudence, Iran’s Law, and French Law: A Comparative Study

In French law, ownership is the legal relation between a person and an object. Accordingly, a lease contract is not deemed a possessory contract proper. Because the property interests are actually nonexistent (i.e. imaginary) and intangible. In this light, Article 1709 of French Civil code provides...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mohammad Riyahi, Mohammad Jafari Fesharaki
Format: Article
Language:fas
Published: Semnan University 2022-06-01
Series:مطالعات فقه و حقوق اسلامی
Subjects:
Online Access:https://feqh.semnan.ac.ir/article_6307_7eeeb1729bac38e2e1294f90d37af75b.pdf
_version_ 1797296365548601344
author Mohammad Riyahi
Mohammad Jafari Fesharaki
author_facet Mohammad Riyahi
Mohammad Jafari Fesharaki
author_sort Mohammad Riyahi
collection DOAJ
description In French law, ownership is the legal relation between a person and an object. Accordingly, a lease contract is not deemed a possessory contract proper. Because the property interests are actually nonexistent (i.e. imaginary) and intangible. In this light, Article 1709 of French Civil code provides that a party binds himself to have the other enjoy a thing during a certain time. That is, the contract is of a liability nature. However, in Article 466 of Iran’s Civil Code, itself based on Emamieh Jurisprudence, a tenancy contract accords ownership of interests to the tenant. The reason is that ownership in Emamieh Jurisprudence and Iran’s law is more extensive than that in French law. In the former, ownership is arbitrary and the object of the contract can be as much arbitrary. To affect ownership, there is no need for tangible or concrete thing, because ownership is essential and does not require a substance. This theory can help shed light on contract consequences such as destruction of hired object or leasehold and the contradiction between Repudiation of Contract and a Void Contract in Article 483 and 489 of Iran’s Civil Code, respectively. This study draws on analytical – descriptive methods.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T22:03:36Z
format Article
id doaj.art-c821fdd69d17485f9587dfefe3aa6489
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2008-7012
2717-0330
language fas
last_indexed 2024-03-07T22:03:36Z
publishDate 2022-06-01
publisher Semnan University
record_format Article
series مطالعات فقه و حقوق اسلامی
spelling doaj.art-c821fdd69d17485f9587dfefe3aa64892024-02-23T23:27:59ZfasSemnan Universityمطالعات فقه و حقوق اسلامی2008-70122717-03302022-06-01142722525410.22075/feqh.2021.20354.24266307Transfer of Nonexistent Property and its Effects in lease contract in Emamieh Jurisprudence, Iran’s Law, and French Law: A Comparative StudyMohammad Riyahi0Mohammad Jafari Fesharaki1P.h.D. student in Private Law, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, IranAssistant Professor Department of Private Law, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, IranIn French law, ownership is the legal relation between a person and an object. Accordingly, a lease contract is not deemed a possessory contract proper. Because the property interests are actually nonexistent (i.e. imaginary) and intangible. In this light, Article 1709 of French Civil code provides that a party binds himself to have the other enjoy a thing during a certain time. That is, the contract is of a liability nature. However, in Article 466 of Iran’s Civil Code, itself based on Emamieh Jurisprudence, a tenancy contract accords ownership of interests to the tenant. The reason is that ownership in Emamieh Jurisprudence and Iran’s law is more extensive than that in French law. In the former, ownership is arbitrary and the object of the contract can be as much arbitrary. To affect ownership, there is no need for tangible or concrete thing, because ownership is essential and does not require a substance. This theory can help shed light on contract consequences such as destruction of hired object or leasehold and the contradiction between Repudiation of Contract and a Void Contract in Article 483 and 489 of Iran’s Civil Code, respectively. This study draws on analytical – descriptive methods.https://feqh.semnan.ac.ir/article_6307_7eeeb1729bac38e2e1294f90d37af75b.pdftransfer of nonexistent propertylease contractinterestsownership
spellingShingle Mohammad Riyahi
Mohammad Jafari Fesharaki
Transfer of Nonexistent Property and its Effects in lease contract in Emamieh Jurisprudence, Iran’s Law, and French Law: A Comparative Study
مطالعات فقه و حقوق اسلامی
transfer of nonexistent property
lease contract
interests
ownership
title Transfer of Nonexistent Property and its Effects in lease contract in Emamieh Jurisprudence, Iran’s Law, and French Law: A Comparative Study
title_full Transfer of Nonexistent Property and its Effects in lease contract in Emamieh Jurisprudence, Iran’s Law, and French Law: A Comparative Study
title_fullStr Transfer of Nonexistent Property and its Effects in lease contract in Emamieh Jurisprudence, Iran’s Law, and French Law: A Comparative Study
title_full_unstemmed Transfer of Nonexistent Property and its Effects in lease contract in Emamieh Jurisprudence, Iran’s Law, and French Law: A Comparative Study
title_short Transfer of Nonexistent Property and its Effects in lease contract in Emamieh Jurisprudence, Iran’s Law, and French Law: A Comparative Study
title_sort transfer of nonexistent property and its effects in lease contract in emamieh jurisprudence iran s law and french law a comparative study
topic transfer of nonexistent property
lease contract
interests
ownership
url https://feqh.semnan.ac.ir/article_6307_7eeeb1729bac38e2e1294f90d37af75b.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT mohammadriyahi transferofnonexistentpropertyanditseffectsinleasecontractinemamiehjurisprudenceiranslawandfrenchlawacomparativestudy
AT mohammadjafarifesharaki transferofnonexistentpropertyanditseffectsinleasecontractinemamiehjurisprudenceiranslawandfrenchlawacomparativestudy