rezahosin gandomkar; MUHAMMAD SALEHIMAZANDARANI; muhammadmahdi hamidi
Abstract
Artificial intelligence has entered many areas of human life and has created new legal challenges. Having legal personality is one of the theories in managing these challenges that has been proposed to justify the contracts concluded by intelligent systems based on the theory of representation. the attribution ...
Read More
Artificial intelligence has entered many areas of human life and has created new legal challenges. Having legal personality is one of the theories in managing these challenges that has been proposed to justify the contracts concluded by intelligent systems based on the theory of representation. the attribution of civil liability resulting from the activities of intelligent systems to the intelligent systems themselves is another function to grant legal personality. However, a coherent and comprehensive study of the harmonization of the current rules of legal entities and its compliance with the features of intelligent agent has not been provided. This article seeks to answer the adequacy or inadequacy of theoretical foundations and legal resources to identify legal personality for intelligent agent, which has been written in a descriptive-analytical manner with a comparative study between jurisprudence, Iranian law and the West. The findings of this study show that each of these systems have significant theoretical foundations for having legal personality, but the status and characteristics of traditional legal entities are not equally applicable to the features of intelligent agent and if this structure not modified , the identification of legal personality for the systems, despite the alternative solutions, will cause legal confusion.
Parviz Bagheri; rezahosin gandomkar; Abdelgabar Zargushnasab
Abstract
The value of consideration in the sale contract has been influenced by the social, economic changes and time and place and the teachings of the scholars in jurisprudence and Iranian law has a significant role in determining the meaning of the ownership. Ownership has no religious fact, but is a customary ...
Read More
The value of consideration in the sale contract has been influenced by the social, economic changes and time and place and the teachings of the scholars in jurisprudence and Iranian law has a significant role in determining the meaning of the ownership. Ownership has no religious fact, but is a customary notion so we should refer to custom of time and place for its meaning at any time and in any place. However, the American and English legislators’ approach toward the ownership of objects are various. From the jurisprudence and domestic law’s viewpoint, things may have little and rare benefit, but this cannot be considered as a permission to make a sale contract in usual circumstances. While, according to the western legislator, such a thing can be regarded as valid in concluding the sale contract. Iranian law and jurisprudence are adherents of transmission of the ownership in all kinds of sales at the time of its conclusion. But, nowadays, this way cannot meet the requirements of the society and the application of legal mechanisms such as retention of the interest clause, time and sharing possession that exist in the American and English legal systems, with considering all the dimensions, is an issue that can be reinvestigated. The present study, through use of a descriptive-analytic method, presents a new reading of the ownability and ownership in the laws of Iran, England and US the result of which is that the Iranian legal system has to update its legal mechanisms to guarantee the rights of the parties. The findings show that ownership is one of the conditions for the validity of the sale, and custom is the criterion for the main and shared indicator in jurisprudence and Iranian law and the western legal system in determining ownership.
Rezahossein Gandomkar
Abstract
Fulfilling the obligations arising from contracts is one of the significant issues in the law of contracts. If each of the parties of the contract or one of them refuses to fulfill his/her contractual obligations, there are various solutions predicted in different legal systems in this regard. In Iranian ...
Read More
Fulfilling the obligations arising from contracts is one of the significant issues in the law of contracts. If each of the parties of the contract or one of them refuses to fulfill his/her contractual obligations, there are various solutions predicted in different legal systems in this regard. In Iranian law, sanction for this type of breach has been stated not implicitly in a general rule in the field of the consequences of the contract but in several legal articles in contracts such as sale, lease, cultivation and proviso. The first solution is to request the court to compel the obligor by the obligee. In the event of the impossibility of this compulsion, the base for the fulfillment of the obligation by the third party would be provided by the cost of the obligor, and as the last resort, the individual injured by the breach may abolish the contract. In other legal systems, various remedies have been foreseen including abolishment of the contract in the case of breach of the fulfillment of the obligation by the obligor for redressing the injury suffered by the injured party arising from breaching the performance of the contract. In Common Law system, in the case of non-fulfillment of the obligation by the obligor, the general principle is reparation. In Roman-Germanic legal system, the obligee is free to request the fulfillment of the obligation or abolish the contract. In Iranian law, the principle is to compel the obligor to fulfill the obligation. However, this solution is acceptable through realizing of certain conditions. The analytical and comparative investigation of this subject in different legal systems and comparing it to the law of Iran is aimed in this article. The present article is comprised of an introduction and 4 sections.