the penalty clause in monetary obligations by analyzing the procedural unity verdict no. 805 of the Supreme Court

Document Type : Scientific research

Authors

Sayed Mohammad Hassan Malaekehpour Shoushtari ¹

Mohsen Alijani ²

¹ Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

² Assistant Prof of Faculty of Law and Political Science , shahid chamran university of ahvaz. ahvaz .iran

https://doi.org/10.22067/economlaw.2022.74203.1122

Abstract

Although the provision of the penalty clause in monetary obligations is common, its promotion has not made its nature and rules acceptable to lawyers without any difference. According to the essence of these obligations, the root of the disputes goes back to the nature of money and the sanctity of loan usury. While the need for new banking has led the legislature to allow for claiming the excess of the amounts paid in the usury-free banking law under certain conditions, disputes over the permission to the provision of such conditions have persisted in other cases. The disagreements have caused the divergence of courts so that the Supreme Court, in line with its duties, issued the procedural unity verdict no. 805. The present study used a descriptive-analytical research method to examine the penalty clause in monetary obligations by analyzing the procedural unity verdict no. 805 of the Supreme Court and relying on judicial procedure. The results show that the penalty clause is valid even if it is higher than the inflation rate.

Keywords

procedural unity verdict no. 805

monetary obligations

penalty clause

criminal clause

article 230 of the civil code

---

©2022 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)

References

•  

  • Abbasi Hosseinabadi, H., & Valizadeh, M. J. (2008). The impact of customary practice on the jurisprudential rule of the theory of the compensation of devaluation of money, Journal of Islamic Law, 9(28), 287-319.
  • Abbasi Khorasani, H. (2020). Lesson outside of jurisprudence. https://www.eshia.ir/Feqh/Archive/text/abbasi_khorasani/feqh2/99/991226/
  • Abedi, M. (2013). Economic and legal analysis of the validity of the criminal penalty clause, Encyclopedia of Judicial Law, 19 (4), 57-77.
  • Abedian, H. & Asadzade, M. & Firuzmand, A. (2010). In the pursuit of justice, the rulings of the Supreme Court in civil matters.(Vol 1) Tehran: Mizan Publication.
  • Abedian, H.. (2007). Comparative study Ability to enforce criminal conditions in contracts; The need to revise Article 230 of the Iranian Civil Code, journal of Theology and Law, (19), 3-44.
  • Barre, R. (1969). Economie politique (Vol.2) (M. Farhang, Trans.). Tehran: Soroush Publications.
  • Darabpour, M., & Soltani Ahmadabad, S. (2015). Legal philosophy and the nature of punitive damages. International Legal Journal, 52, 61-90.
  • Ghasemi Hamed, A. & Khosravi Farsani, A. & Aghababaei, F. (2014). Punitive damages in Iranian law, Legal Journal of Justice, (81), 162-187.
  • Haeri, S. K. (1415 AH), Al-Awaraq Al-Maliyah Al-Atebari, Risālat al-Thaqalayn Journal, 3 (9), 92-112.
  • Hashemi Shahroudi, M. (1382 AH). Encyclopedia of jurisprudence according to the religion of Ahl al-Bayt (Vol. 2). Qom: Institute of Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence.
  • Hashemi Shahroudi, M. (1433 AH). Contemporary jurisprudential readings (Vol.2). Qom: Institute of Islamic Jurisprudence.
  • Hashemi Shahroudi, S. M. (1999). Jurisprudential rules of the devaluation of money, Dardesi, 16, 5-11.
  • Hatami, A. & Sadeghi, A. (2013). Unjust liquidated damages term, Journal of Legal Knowledge and Research, 2, 59-104.
  • Jafari Langroudi, M. J. (1984). Law of obligations (Vol. 1), Tehran: University of Tehran Press.
  • Javadi Amoli, A. (2015). Lesson outside of jurisprudence, https://www.eshia.ir/Feqh/Archive/text/javadi/feqh/93/940215/
  • Karimi, A. (2019). Criticism of the lawsuit, )ir/kv2el3 (
  • Karimi, A., & Karimi, S. (2007). Critique of judgment 910913 of Tehran General Legal Court: the effect of non-observance of Article 139 of the criminal code on the validity of the arbitration agreement. Quarterly Journal of Rai, 6, 35-44.
  • Katozian, N. (2012). Non-contractual obligations - civil liability (Vol. 1). Tehran: University of Tehran Press.
  • Katozian, N. (2014). General rules of contracts, (Vol. 4). Tehran: Publishing Joint Stock Company.
  • Kharazi, S. M. (2006). Paper money, Journal of Jurisprudence of Ahl Al-Bayt, 47, 93-110.
  • Khodabakhshi, A. (2021). Lawsuits (Vol. III) Analysis and Critique of Judicial Procedure, Tehran: Publishing Joint Stock Company.
  • Khosravi Farsani, A., & Biranvand, Sh. (2010). A comparative study of penalty clause and punitive damages, Legal Journal of Judiciary, 74 (70), 133-151
  • Malakehpour Shoushtari, S. M. (2021). Possibility of endowment (waqf) of ‎proprietary worth in light of a new analysis of the endowment contract. Private Law Studies, 3, 589-606.
  • Mankiw, N. G. (2018). Macroeconomics (H. R. Arbab, Trans.). Tehran: Ney Publishing.
  • Mirshekari, A. (2017). Adjustment of liquidated damages, Two Quarterly Journal of Judicial Procedure-Private Law,, (1), 33-38.
  • Mohaghegh Ahmad Abadi, S.M., &, Rezaei Nejad, H. (2020). Delays in the implementation of the monetary obligation and its effects (analysis of case law and critique of judicial procedure), Quarterly Journal of Private Law Research, 26, 271-294.
  • Mohaghegh Damad, S. M. (2007). Rules of jurisprudence in the civil sector 2,Tehran: Samt.
  • Mohaghegh Damad, S. M. (2009). The general theory of clauses and obligations in Islamic law. Tehran: Center for the Publication of Humanities.
  • Mohaghegh Damad, S. M. (2020). The general theory of the negation of difficulty in Islamic law. Tehran: Center for the Publication of Islamic Sciences.
  • Montazeri Najafabadi, H. A. (2009). Treatise of requests for a legal opinion (Vol.2). Qom.
  • Mosaei, M. (2005). Investigating the reasons for the compensation of devaluation of money. Quarterly Journal of Business Research, 34, 149-187.
  • Mousavi Bojnourdi, S. M. (1375). Jurisprudential rules of money, Journal of Ahl al-Bayt Jurisprudence, (7),9-42.
  • Namvar, S., & Hassani, A. (2011). A comparative study of penalty clause in French and Iranian law, Journal of Shabak, 7, 11-24.
  • Ranjbar, R., & Salaripour, E. (2011). A study of the nature and principles of legal jurisprudence of penalty clause, Quarterly Journal of Jurisprudence and Principles of Islamic Law, 3 (8 & 9), 6-37.
  • Sadr, S. M. (1401 AH). Al-Bank Al-Rabwi Fi Al-Islam. Lebanon: Dar Al-Ta'arif Press.
  • Shahidi, M. (2004). Civil Law, Volume III, Effects of Contracts and Obligations, Tehran: Majd Publication.
  • Shiravi, A.(2000). Critique of the rules of civil procedure regarding the claim for contractual damages and delay in payment, Journal of Qom Higher Education Complex, (9), 7-50
  • Sobhan, J. (2017). Lesson outside of jurisprudence, https://www.eshia.ir/Feqh/Archive/text/sobhani/feqh/96/961115/
  • Takhiri, M. A. (2003). The financial criminal clause in usury-free banking, Ahl al-Bayt Fiqh Journal, 35, 63-71.
  • Yousefi, A. A. (2002). Compensation of the devaluation of money in debts and financial relations. Islamic Economics, 2(6), 45-66.