Jurists believe that Arsh is contrary to the rule and they deny its entrance in other options. Civil law, only in the discussion of Khiyar Eyb, has spoken of the right to receive Arsh and has not prescribed it in other options. Most of the lawyers has the same viewpoint
More
Jurists believe that Arsh is contrary to the rule and they deny its entrance in other options. Civil law, only in the discussion of Khiyar Eyb, has spoken of the right to receive Arsh and has not prescribed it in other options. Most of the lawyers has the same viewpoints and tried hardly in justification of civil law in this regard. It seems that in Khiyar Eyb, Arsh is receivable when deficiency or lack of health causes a change in value and price of traded goods without loss of the whole value of those goods. A point that can be regarded in jurists’ viewpoints and civil law relates to the nature of Arsh which is the performance guarantee of the contract itself. In this regard, in any reciprocal contract as a sale, the parties undertake an implicit manner to establish equality and balance between the value of the goods and its price and implementation in contract and if each party breaks this commitment, the obligation must force him to implement this commitment. Accordingly, it seems that Arsh is not only contrary to any rule but only it can be exigible in other options in which lack of effective factor causes violation of commitment in making relative balance in value of the goods.
Manuscript profile
