Jafar Salmanzadeh; Hamid Masjedsaraei
Abstract
As a legal obligation or a contract is breached, the injured party should not postpone claiming damages. Rather, they, as normal human beings, should take conventional steps to avoid possible loss. This duty begins when the promised party become aware of the breach of the obligation and are capable of ...
Read More
As a legal obligation or a contract is breached, the injured party should not postpone claiming damages. Rather, they, as normal human beings, should take conventional steps to avoid possible loss. This duty begins when the promised party become aware of the breach of the obligation and are capable of mitigation of damages. Given the lack of explicit rules for mitigation of damages in Iran’s law, the terms and procedures of mitigation of damages have not been clarified in its law. Under what circumstances, the duty to mitigation of damages is given to the injured party? If the injured party is incompetent, who will take the responsibility for mitigation of damages? Is it possible to enforce the rules of damages in cases of likely breach of contract? Is the obligation to the injured party is an obligation to means or an obligation to ends? The comparative study of these issues in the light of the law of the United States can help identify and clarify the strengths and weaknesses of the rule of mitigation of damages.