A Comparative Study of the Possibility of Mitigation of Damage Resulted from Contract Violation in Iranian and English Legal Systems

Subject Areas : Political and International Researches Quarterly

fatah karimi ¹ , Najad Ali Almasi ² , Abdallah kiaei ³

1 - PhD Student in Private Law, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran
2 - Professor, Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3 - Assistant Professor, Department of Private Law, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran

Received: 2021-09-23 Accepted : 2021-09-23 Published : 2021-11-22

Keywords: Damage, Contract, Injured Party, Guilt Law,

Abstract :

The differences between the Iranian and British legal systems in contravention of contractual obligations is the requirement to fulfill obligations in Iranian law and claim for damages in British law. This difference has made the claim for damages in British law more systematic and specific. Therefore, if a contract is violated, the obligee and the victim of the violation cannot watch the loss, but should avoid increasing the damage. Therefore, if the perpetrator of the damage can prove in court that the cause of the increase in damage was the result of the negligence of the injured party, this argument will be accepted. The rule of guilt of the injured party is accepted in British law and gradually in the law of France and some other countries. In this article, this issue has been examined. According to the jurisprudential principles, including the rule of action, no harm, and some legal provisions, including Article 167 of the Constitution, to what extent is the rule of guilt and mitigation of damages in violation of contractual obligations applicable in Iranian law