Unfair Term in Morality, Law and Islamic Jurisprudence

Any condition being forced by stronger party of a contract to weak one which inevitably accepted relying on the authority of such stronger party, may be called an "Unfair Term". Although, typically, parties conclude a contract based on "the principle of autonomy of volition (will authority)" but absolute acceptance of such principle is not compatible with some objectivities nowadays. Thus, as a way of supporting vulnerable sectors of society, legal systems prevent abuse of great economy powers, and establish justice in society by intercepting such kind of conditions. Despite the necessity and importance of legislation, in Iran legal system, a general principle for treating unfair terms has not been formed yet but encountering of Iranian legislator with such terms in miscellaneous rules is worthy to be analysed and evaluated. Like, perhaps, any other civil law system, under Iran legal system, the bases for attacking unfair terms may be found within the context of limitation or exclusion of liability clauses and also general principles of contracts under the subjects of "consent" as well as the "purpose of transactions". Furthermore, judicial precedent may be able to support weak parties of contracts by generalization of what have been regulated for specific subjects regarding unfair terms to contracts in general. Despite all new conceptualization of this term, some clues of acceptance of it may be found in writings of Islamic Jurisprudents. Topics like "urgency to deal, forgiveness of lucre, satisfaction of transitions, counterparty deals, hardship in contracts" and what is known by jurisprudents as "equality in contract" may be helpful to achieve the jurisprudential basis for unfair term..