Introduction

Time has always been one of the most significant factors in the analysis of contractual relationships and the determination of the status of contractual performance. According to the traditional analysis of contract law, prior to the maturity of an obligation, neither breach of contract nor the possibility of invoking contractual remedies is generally recognized. This approach, reflected in Iranian law under Article 226 of the Civil Code and in French law through the doctrine of mise en demeure and Article 1231 of the French Civil Code, is primarily based on the model of instantaneous obligations. However, the development of modern contractual relationships, particularly in construction contracts, participation in construction agreements, pre-sale contracts, and continuous service contracts, shows that not all obligations can be analyzed according to the model of instantaneous obligations. In many of these relationships, the fulfillment of the contractual objective depends upon the continuous performance of the obligation over time, and interruption of performance may, even before the final maturity date, seriously endanger the possibility of contractual performance.
Research Question(s)
In this context, several important questions arise. Must a continuous obligation necessarily arise within a continuous contract, or may a continuous obligation also exist within an instantaneous contract? Furthermore, in the event of interruption of the performance of a continuous obligation, may the obligee seek specific performance or damages before the final maturity date, or does the principle that an obligation is not yet due prevent the application of contractual remedies until the final due date?
2. Literature Review
Despite the theoretical and practical significance of this issue, much of the existing scholarship in Iranian and French law has focused primarily on the conceptual analysis of continuous contracts or the doctrine of demand, while the independent examination of breach of continuous obligations prior to the final maturity date has received comparatively little attention. In common law literature, a related issue has been discussed under the concepts of Anticipatory Breach and Anticipatory Repudiation, reflecting the challenges faced by the traditional temporal analysis of contractual liability in continuous contractual relationships.
3. Methodology
This research adopts a descriptive-analytical methodology with a comparative approach in Iranian and French law. In the descriptive section, the concepts of continuous contracts, continuous obligations, instantaneous obligations, and the role of time in contractual performance are examined through the analysis of Iranian and French legal doctrine. In the analytical section, the study evaluates the provisions of the Iranian Civil Code, the French Civil Code, and doctrinal opinions in order to explain the possibility of recognizing an actual breach of continuous obligations before the final maturity date.
4. Results and Discussion
The primary objective of this study is to examine the possibility of recognizing the breach of continuous obligations prior to the final maturity date and to analyze its legal consequences under Iranian and French law. The study seeks to show that, in continuous obligations, breach of obligation cannot be confined solely to the final due date and that interruption or disruption in the process of performance may, in certain circumstances, constitute a contractual breach even before the final maturity date.
The findings of this research indicate that there is no complete overlap between “continuous contracts” and “continuous obligations.” A contract may be instantaneous in terms of its legal effects while simultaneously creating obligations of a continuous nature. Therefore, what is decisive in analyzing the status of breach is not merely the classification of the contract itself, but rather the nature of the obligation and the manner in which it is performed over time. In continuous obligations, continuity of performance constitutes part of the substance of the obligation, and consequently, interruption or disruption of performance may itself amount to an actual breach prior to the final maturity date.
The study further shows that a distinction must be drawn between “delay in the performance of the final obligation” and “interruption of the continuous performance process.” In instantaneous obligations, breach generally occurs upon the final due date; however, in continuous obligations, the process of breach may begin before maturity and continue progressively over time. For instance, in construction contracts, suspension of construction operations, even before the final delivery date, may seriously jeopardize the contractual purpose and inflict actual loss upon the obligee.
The examination of French law indicates that although the traditional analysis of contractual liability has been based on the necessity of maturity and mise en demeure, modern doctrinal developments, particularly following the 2016 reform of the French Civil Code, have provided a basis for greater attention to the economic function of contracts and responses to disruptions in the continuous performance of obligations. Likewise, under Iranian law, it is possible to justify recognition of an actual breach in continuous obligations through reliance on general principles of contract law, including the binding force of contracts, good faith in contractual performance, prevention of harm, and interpretation of contracts according to the parties’ common intention.
5. Conclusion
The findings of this research indicate that Article 226 of the Iranian Civil Code should not be interpreted in a manner that precludes any legal response to disruptions in the performance of continuous obligations until the final maturity date. In cases of unjustified interruption of continuous performance, the obligee should, where appropriate, be entitled to seek specific performance, claim damages, and, in certain cases, terminate the contract. Such an approach, while being more consistent with the economic realities of continuous contracts, may strengthen the protective function of contract law and prevent substantial losses to the obligee.