فهرست مطالب حسن امیدوار

The function of contemporary contract law goes beyond its classical function, which focused on the principle of contractual private and mutual interests. So that the function of contract law is to achieve social goals that are mainly to protect the security of legal relationship and necessity of debts payment, and not to harm others, the market regulation function whose main purpose is to support the market institution with three different approaches, -the self-reliance policy and minimal intervention, the transactional policy and exceptional intervention to finding the best solution to prevent the party from escaping the transaction, and the functional policy. Also, economic goals based on specific and case by case strategy such as the relief of hardship policies and general strategy such as economic planning policy of general rules to increase economic social welfare.A transaction with the intention of escaping from religion is a legal act that has caused difficulties in ensuring judicial justice, because the obligee by concluding such a transaction practically deprives himself of financial power and as a result, his previous obligation becomes non-binding according to the provisions related to debt.On the one hand, this situation causes losses to the creditors who have entered into a long-term transaction with the debtor's property in trust, and on the other hand, it causes the trader to benefit unjustly and illegitimately from the legal protections of the debtors, because according to the legal philosophy of these protection provisions, assistance is to the real debtors who themselves did not voluntarily expose them to debt, not those who use these protections as a means to escape from their obligations.In addition, the prevalence of this type of transaction, which leads to the appearance of a transaction without a composition, which is known as a formal transaction, and also the conclusion of a transaction without the intention of implementation, leads to the justice of the law of contracts and the provision of judicial justice, facing a problem in the subject law. to be The explanation of the issue is that the status of any contract can be examined in two stages: First, it is in the identification and legitimizing stage, in which the contract is evaluated in terms of social interests and general goals of contract law. If the transaction was in accordance with the goals of the basic principles, it will be recognized in the structure of the rights of the contracts, otherwise it will be declared prohibited. For example, Gharari transactions are not recognized in Islamic law, because it is against the goals of the basic principles. If a deal in this stage is in accordance with the underlying principles, it will be accepted and then it will be the second stage of its validation in the relations of the parties and in a case-by-case manner, whether the concluded contract has the correctness conditions? Therefore, the compliance of the transaction with the general rules and goals of contract law is referred to as legitimacy, and its non-compliance is referred to as illegitimacy and its compliance with superstructure rules, and its non-compliance is referred to as "nullity". It is worth remembering that although many books and articles have been written about this, but all of them have analyzed the issue from the point of view of validity and invalidity, while this article examines from the point of view of the legitimacy of the principle of the transaction, which according to the principle of respecting the rights of creditors, the trust of the Muslim market. And the social benefits and the need to resolve the conflict, has he considered such a deal as legitimate? In Iran's contract law, "transaction with the intention of evading debt payment" has become a legal problem in contractual relations, because on the one hand, in Article 218 of the Civil Code, such a transaction is considered valid and valid, and on the other hand, in the criminal regulations, It can be prosecuted under the title of fraud and other criminal titles. In this article, in an analytical-descriptive method, while rethinking and deepening the principles of contract law and distinguishing the superstructure and underlying principles, the status of this transaction was investigated in accordance with the basic principles of contract law, i.e. the principles from which the rules governing contracts are adapted.The main question of the current research is, what is the legal status of the transaction with the intention of avoiding debt payment from the perspective of the basic principles of contract law? It seems that the invalidity of this transaction is considered from the point of view of Sharia, because it brings consequences such as harming the creditor's income, depriving the Muslim market of confidence and increasing contract disputes, all of which are considered illegitimate according to Shari'a argumentsTherefore, in this article, in accordance with the general goals and function of contemporary contract law, in a descriptive-analytical manner, the Iranian contract law approach to the transaction with the purpose to escape debt payment was examined and it was proved that this transaction is not compatible with any of these goals so it is necessary to be changed.

A transaction conducted with the intention of evading debt payment is a legal act that poses challenges to ensuring judicial justice. By engaging in such a transaction, the obligee practically diminishes their financial power, rendering their previous obligation non-binding according to debt-related provisions. This situation leads to losses for creditors who have entered into long-term transactions with the debtor, as they trusted the debtor's property as collateral. Conversely, it allows the trader to unjustly and illegitimately benefit from legal protections meant for debtors. The purpose of these protection provisions is to assist genuine debtors who did not willingly expose themselves to debt, not those who exploit these protections to escape their obligations.
The prevalence of such transactions, which result in the appearance of formal transactions without substance and transactions lacking the intention of implementation, poses a problem for contract law and the provision of judicial justice. The issue can be explained by examining the status of any contract in two stages. First, there is the stage of identification and legitimization, where the contract is evaluated based on social interests and the general objectives of contract law. If the transaction aligns with the underlying principles, it will be recognized as part of the structure of contractual rights; otherwise, it will be deemed prohibited. For instance, Gharari transactions are not recognized in Islamic law as they contradict the fundamental principles. Once a deal passes this stage, it enters the second stage, which involves validating the contract in specific circumstances and in relation to the parties involved. This assessment determines whether the concluded contract meets the conditions of correctness. Therefore, the conformity of a transaction with the general rules and goals of contract law is referred to as legitimacy, while its non-compliance is considered illegitimacy, resulting in its nullity.
It is worth noting that although numerous books and articles have analyzed this issue from the perspective of validity and invalidity, this article examines it from the standpoint of transactional legitimacy. It explores whether a transaction with the intention of evading debt payment can be considered legitimate, considering the principles of respecting creditors' rights, fostering trust in the market, and promoting social benefits while resolving conflicts. In Iran's contract law, the "transaction with the intention of evading debt payment" has become a legal issue in contractual relations. Article 218 of the Civil Code considers such a transaction valid and enforceable, while criminal regulations allow for its prosecution under fraud and other criminal charges. This article adopts an analytical-descriptive approach to delve into the principles of contract law, differentiate between superstructure and underlying principles, and investigate the status of this transaction in light of the basic principles from which contractual rules are derived.
The main research question addressed in this study is: What is the legal status of transactions with the intention of evading debt payment from the perspective of the basic principles of contract law? From a Sharia perspective, it seems that the invalidity of such transactions is warranted due to their detrimental consequences, including harm to creditors' income, erosion of trust in the Muslim market, and an increase in contract disputes—all of which are considered illegitimate according to Sharia arguments. Furthermore, the findings of this research indicate that transactions with the intention of evading debt payment are inconsistent with the principles of justice, contractual security (which necessitates fulfilling obligations and paying debts), and the legitimacy of the transactional purpose. Therefore, due to their lack of authenticity and validity, they cannot be considered legitimate according to principles like the rule of dominion and the principle of the sovereignty of will.
While freedom of contract and the sovereignty of will are fundamental principles in contract law, their real function is to establish a foundation and create a framework for the rules of contract law. Contract law comprises two categories of principles: basic principles and governing principles (superstructure). A transaction with the intention of evading debt payment does not necessarily conflict with fundamental principles of contract law, such as the principle of authenticity, as these principles primarily govern the relationship between the parties involved in the contract. However, in terms of basic principles such as the principle of security, the necessity of fulfilling obligations and paying debts, closing legal avenues for evading execution and fulfillment, ensuring justice in legal relations, and preventing support for illegitimate goals, a transaction with the intention of evading debt payment contradicts these principles and cannot be supported.
Such a transaction also goes against the goals of contract law as it has illegitimate objectives and purposes. The philosophy underlying contract law is to uphold legitimate goals while preventing illegitimate ones. Therefore, it is necessary to revise the judicial and legal approach to such transactions in Iran's contract law. Based on the underlying principles, transactions with the intention of evading debt payment should be unequivocally deemed illegitimate and void.

Man is a social being with social ties who is bound by a set of human and social obligations and contracts to meet his needs and achieve his goals. There are different opinions between jurists and in terms of the Holy Quran on how to arrange the contract and the formal conditions of the contract. A number of scholars consider the creation of a contract to be oral and some in writing. This article examines the security of contracts and its principles in the Holy Qur'an and tries to explain their reasons. Create people in the community. Therefore, solutions can be found in the Qur'anic principles such as the transparency of the text of the contract, as if the contract was unambiguous and written, which will lead to the strength and security of the contract. One of the most important reasons given for the non-legal monopoly of contracts is the holy verse, "O you who believe, and you who enter into contracts." In this article, which has been written in a descriptive-analytical manner and using library resources, the meaning of the verse is not limited to contracts in the time of the Shari'a, as well as the problems raised around it. "Contracts" refers to emerging contracts.

the aim of present research is to study the role of peace culture on amount of family aggression among university students of Tehran (Case Study: Tehranian Azad University Students of Roodhen). Method of this research in term of goal was developmental and practical study as well as in term of the path was descriptive correlational study.The Research population included all of the university students of Azad university of Rodehen among them about 400subjects were selected by size stratified random sampling .To collect data, researcher –made questionnaire included demographical, peace culture and violent family aggression characteristics.that its quality by CVR coefficient for measuring validity with 0.737 average and reliability with 0.939 average approved. Collected data analyzed by SPSS and Lisrel software. Findings showed that peace culture constitade of four-factor construct as following: understanding and healthy interaction of family, social support, ability to resolve conflicts and misunderstanding. Five factors were extracted from questionnaire: cultural violence, spiritual-psychological abuse, verbal aggression, economical violence and physical violence.Type of marriage, education of parents, job of parents had no significant effects. Effects of alcohol addiction of parents , job of father, ethnic of parents, duration of marriage, and age of parents had significant effects on violence. There was a negative significant relation between peace culture and its components with family aggression.