Investigating the effects of the prying deal in jurisprudence, Iranian law and British law

Mohammad Hassan Hadipoor¹

1) Master of Private Law

IOI Code : XDKH-GGKHK
Publication : Second National Conference on Law, Jurisprudence and Culture(conflaw.ir)
Abstract :
    In Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law, the ruling of a prying transaction is in most cases non-influence. In English law, a voyeur transaction is void for itself, except in exceptional cases, and its transaction for the owner is valid only if the intention of the agency is disclosed. This difference in rules is rooted in the existence of different principles in these systems. By examining these principles, the authors believe that the basis of prying transactions in Iranian jurisprudence and law is the theory of citation to the owner , but in British law, prying transactions for themselves follow the theory of contract management and prying transactions for the owner follow the theory of representation due to enforcement . he does. Despite the differences in principles and rulings, there are many similarities in the effects of prying transactions in the above legal systems; As far as the common opinion can be said; Curiosity rulings in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law, like British law, can be enforced only under special conditions. Examination of the effects of prying transactions shows that the license of rejection or enforcement and genuine adherence are the most important effects of prying transactions in both legal systems.

Keywords : intrusive transaction citation to the owner representation resulting from enforcement