2With the development of new technologies, smart contracts have become popular among people as a new type of legal contracts, and their use may cause disputes between the parties. the smart contract is the source of disputes between the parties once disputes arise from smart contracts between parties and they refer to the law court to resolve them accordingly. Additionally, it is considered one of the most important proofs of claim. Therefore, to accredit these contracts, the parties must be aware of their nature as a rationale. However, library studies, analyzing Iran's laws and regulations, and features and mechanisms of smart contracts indicate that the contracts, as electronic evidence, are essentially electronic documents with attributes such as being inscribed, invocable, and retaining a signature; it is, therefore, conceivable to refer/submit such instruments in law court given the requirements for invocable electronic evidence, such as authenticity, accessibility, and assignability, are implicated in the contracts. Consistent with the probative value,  although they are potentially closer to the concept of secure electrical reason, but such contracts are likely to be considered standard electronic evidence, deniable and dubitable, or maybe secure electronic evidence, which is likely only to be claimed for falsification.

In accordance with privity of contract, a contract cannot confer rights or impose obligations to third parties,but, as a legal reality, a contract is invocable against third parties, and they cannot ignore its effect. The reverse of the mentioned situation is, also, true and third parties cannot affect a contract. Nonetheless, there is a borderline state in which a contract affects the third party’, s potential right, although it does not directly confer rights or impose obligations. There are two theories to set out this situation: inoperativeness and non-opposability. Jurists have different opinions about the instances of, and the relation between, them. This article claims that they are the same. They both are created to protect the rights of third parties,in both states, the contract has effects between contracting parties and has no effect to third parties. Applying the third party’, s right, according to circumstances, can dissolve the contract or does not affect it.