نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی
2 دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
The risk of mistake reflects the probability of non-conformity between parties' assumptions and reality. In modern law, non-assumption of risk is a prerequisite for invoking mistake; as by assuming risk, the discrepancy between perception and reality integrates into mutual assent. Thus, discovering such a discrepancy realizes contractual terms, not an actionable mistake. Accordingly, if mistake risk is allocated to the aggrieved party—expressly or impliedly—they forfeit avoidance rights. However, this rule is not absolute; its validity depends on public policy and parties' true intent. In the Iranian legal framework, this condition is not explicitly formulated, and its application can face Gharar (prohibited uncertainty) challenges. Thus, the primary question is whether non-assumption of risk constitutes a condition for invoking mistake under Iranian law. If so, how can the boundary between valid risk assumption and invalidating Gharar be delineated? Findings reveal traces of risk assumption within domestic institutions. By distinguishing invalidating Gharar from reasonable risks—which legitimize a wide spectrum of uncertainty-based contracts—the suspicion of Gharar regarding mistakes is dismissed. Consequently, risk assumption can be considered a bar to invoking mistake in the Iranian legal system.
کلیدواژهها English
