The contracting world is witnessing the strengthening of the Contractual dimension and the ethics ofthe relationship in it every day. One of the consequences ofsuch attention is the design of new foundations in order to ensure maximum Contractual justice, one ofthe most important of which is the solidarity-Contractual basis. The basis is the Obligation to pay attention to the interests of the contractors in the rights and Obligations of the contract, and in particular in the Obligation to provide information, which is justified in the Iranian legal system based on the introduction of the Constitution and its principles 2 and 3. Obligation to provide information on a new basis transcends the principles of satisfaction and good faith, which were limited to the pre-Contractual Obligation of information, and includes all stages ofthe contractlife. In addition tothe Obligation to teach, It also includes the Obligation to give notice and the Obligation to advise. In the Obligation to teach, obedience is provided by providing information in a crude form and a low degree of consideration is given to the interests of the contracting partner. But inthe Obligation to give notice, emphasizing the negative aspects and risks of legal action, and in the Obligation to advise it goes beyond this and tries to direct the decision around the most appropriate action with the cooperation ofthe parties.

Unequal bargaining power of parties to a franchise contract and their unequal access to information that may be effective in determining the consideration of a contract; has caused different legal systems impose Obligations to franchisor to poise the Contractual balancing. Commitment to expose accurate and comprehensive pre-Contractual information about all aspects related to franchise is the most important Obligation in order to achieve the above objective. Judicial decisions of leading countries in franchising services show that an important part of Contractual disputes related to this commitment. This article also analyzes purview and remedies of the violation of that Obligation. In this regard, nullity, relative nullity and adaptation of contract are discussed. Acceptable theory in Iranian civil law is analyzed.

The contract is result of agreement. Sometimes, after the conclusion of a contract, one of the parties understands that in the time of conclusion it hasn’t been equilibrium between the subjects of contract that there is "option of loss". Sometime in the time of conclusion, there is economic equilibrium but during of executing of contract this balance disappears and execution of contract is so difficult that customarily is not tolerable. In the other words, there is a “new loss”. In Iranian civil law, when there is loss in the time of conclusion, there is option of loss by principle of “no harm” and other sources. But after the conclusion of contract, when the balance grossly disappears, there is no solution. In the law of some of Islamic countries the judge can reasonably adjust the parties' Obligations. It shows that the basis of adjustment can be fined in the Islamic law and the examination of Islamic texts shows that the adjustment has been regarded profoundly. This article wants to bring up the subject of adjustment with use of Islamic reasons and comparative law.

Numerous legal questions have been raised about the outbreak of the deadly epidemic Covid 19, which requires legal systems to answer these questions. For example, this pandemic has led governments to take various measures to better ensure the health of their people. This has led to drastic changes in the economy and greatly affected Contractual relations between people. In order to meet the legal needs of all, legal systems have come up with ways to regulate new laws for keeping public interest and avoid corruption, to establish justice and order. In this article, an attempt has been made to consider the views of various legal systems in the face of severe economic changes caused by Covid 19 in order to discard the principle of binding effect of contracts, paying attention to excuses and their impact on the contract and explain the effect of hardship on contract performance. Finally It should be analyzed the remedies of dissolution, suspension and adjustment based on the accepted principles in different legal systems. In the context in question, Islamic law, as a legal system based on principles, rules and regulations, especially in the field of transactions in order to provide the interests of the people and avoid corruption, includes regulations that express the remedies (dissolution, suspension and adjustment)

Overriding Mandatory Rules (OMR), which claim to be applied regardless of the application of conflict of laws rules, are a widely used yet relatively new concept in the legal literature that has not been thoroughly examined from the perspective of private international law. Given the transformation of international commercial arbitration into the primary forum for resolving Contractual disputes, it is necessary to clarify the approach of arbitration bodies to the issue of OMR. Therefore, from a theoretical perspective, it is necessary to complete the research literature in this field. From a practical perspective, due to Iran's exposure to multiple examples of OMR in international commercial disputes (such as rules on sanctions, consumer protection, competition law, and currency control), understanding the limits of the applicability of third-country OMR can help to protect national interests of Iran in these disputes.In this study, using a descriptive-analytical research method, library and internet sources related to the subject were reviewed with an emphasis on arbitral awards.The findings of the study indicate that third-country OMR are generally applied with stricter standards than those of the governing law, based on conflict of laws analyses and arbitrator's duty to render a binding award. However, the non-application of third-country OMR in arbitration precedent has occured due to several reasons: the lack of adherence by arbitrators to conflict of laws rules, the lack of a close connection between the OMR and the dispute, the non-superiority of the goals provided by the OMR over those of the law of.

Background and Aim: One of the conditions that the parties agree on when drafting the contract is determining the condition of the Obligation. The present article seeks to examine the "adjustment of the Contractual Obligation in the 2016 French Civil Code. " Materials and Methods: The research method is comparative and the data collection method is documentary-legal analysis. Ethical considerations: The writing of the present article is based on the observance of ethical principles of writing articles, including fidelity in citation. Results: Comparison of previous laws and the amendment of the French Civil Code (2016) is mainly based on compliance and convergence with the international environment is influenced by the phenomenon of globalization in order to be able to modernize it while maintaining the original structure of the civil law. Conclusion: The French legislature seeks to bring contracts and their Obligations into line with European law. In the next step, to ensure equality and observance between the interests of the parties, regardless of market requirements. In this sense, it is a progressive law that other legal systems can take advantage of, taking into account indigenous conditions.

Responsibility literally means to be obligated or committed to do something. Duty refers to something that is legally or customarily incumbent on someone. Homework also means burdening someone with hard work and suffering. Commitment means taking on a job as well as making a covenant. Right also means share and share. Each of these words is somehow related to each other. For example, unless someone has a duty, he will not be responsible for doing it or not, and he will not be held accountable. The word homework is also associated with responsibility and duty; Because in all three cases, something is the responsibility of the person that its implementation is necessary and obligatory. Naturally, a person's divine human personality and his or her faith beliefs will play a key role in commitment and fulfillment of extraterritorial duties. In the present article, using a descriptive-analytical method and based on qualitative content analysis, the role of the individual's spiritual and doctrinal personality in the commitment to fulfill duties and contracts has been explained and ambiguities have been answered in this regard.

When the parties enter into agreements in the contract, the Obligations arise and the agreements may not be implemented as expected by the parties, in which case there are damages from breach of contract. Compensation requires determining the extent of compensable damages, foreseeability of damage is a criterion for determining the extent of damages. In Iranian law, influenced by fiqh sources, there are two sources for determining the liability: usurpation and opposability, damages resulting from a breach of contract are not separate from the opposability, The relationship of legal causality, which requires a proportionality between damages and breach of contract, which justifies by foreseeability of damage. This kind of approach is contrary to the originality of the Contractual liability, which considers the provisions of the contract time as a criterion for determining the extent of damages. There is no provision in Iranian law that determines certain characteristics for the ability to predict damage in contract law. In French and English law, the Contractual responsibility is predicted and in French civil law and the English judicial procedure explicitly the time of the contract is unique unless it has a deliberate intention to violate its Obligations. 

Arising from the nature of international law, there is a general duty to bring internal law into conformity with Obligations under international law. Islamic Republic of Iran as a contracting State of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), internationally accepted that "no one shall be imprisoned merely on the ground of inability to fulfil a Contractual Obligation". Although that is a non-derogable right, but it appears that the Iranian "Legal Enforcement of Pecuniary Condemnations Act (1998)" is in itself a breach of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It is certain that Iran can not rely on her own legislation to limit the scope of her international Obligations.

one of the issues that have been discussed in jurisprudential and legal books is the option which is resulted from the breakdown of the contract, which Iran’ s civil code has also dealt with in the materials (441, 442, 443). In the meantime, the important issue is the study of the legal and juridical foundations of this option. In short, it can be said that the option of sale unfulfilled in part is in the case that, for example, the sale contract is void regarding to some part of the object of the sale in some ways. In this case, the customer can terminate the contract or be satisfied with it and retake the price in return to the void part of the sale. Of course, it should be noted that this option is not specified to the sale, it is current in all contracts of exchange. The option of sale unfulfilled in part has two basic conditions: one is the void of the sale in respect to one part of the object of the sale and the other is the customer’ s ignorance to this invalidation during the transaction. Although several juridical and legal foundations for the option of sale unfulfilled in part have been given, investigatingly, one can only refer to the “ theory of commutative justice” and “ risk theory” as its legal basis and exemplification of “ the defect” , “ the violation of the condition of the implication” , “ the rule of negation of uncertainty” and the “ rule of no harm” as the its jurisprudential foundations.