فهرست مطالب سیدجعفر کاظم پور

One of the solutions the legislator has used in the “Supporting Children and Teenagers without Guardians Act” is taking a guarantee from guardianship candidates. Despite its positive consequences, it acts as an obstacle for the promotion of guardianship as an institution based on philanthropy and praised in religious teachings. This paper seeks to provide other solutions to better protect the rights of the guardian while also dealing with the legislator’s concerns about providing for the children’s future expenses.

The developments of trade, economic liberalism, and, as a consequence, the appearance of economic powers, have introduced an intense difference between rich and poor classes. The opportunity of economic power bears the ability of exploiting poor classes. The need to food, treatment, and other essential needs like education and employment, forces weaker classes into contracts which in spite of being seemingly accompanied by free will, may look quite unequal and oppressive in the light of constraint.Imposing unequal economic contractual terms causes the fans of justice to react against unfairness. Although the constrained protection necessitates recognizing the contract he has entered into, if there is a suspicion of unfairness in a contract, the constrained protection can express itself in a different manner.The subjects of this article are the approaches of the constrained protection, equalizing the contract, and omitting unfair and oppressive terms. These are not indefensible in the thoughts of Muslim jurisprudents and the Iranian legislation system.

In modern law, the unconscionability of contracts has become a basis for vast intervention of government in contracts law. Upon this basis, some protective rules were legislated for protection of the consumers’ rights and preventing misuse of stronger economic situations and anti-competitive actions. Although, the elements of contractual unconscionability are not as clear as it necessitates. These legal systems have pursued different approaches. The American Law has presented the general theory of the unconscionability of contracts. In some legal systems of European countries, the applicable and operative system has a special place in which precise and particular examples of the unconscionable contracts are considered. On the other hand, the Iranian law has not dealt with the elements of this case. Thus, studying various rules, one can merely achieve few of these examples. It is required for the Iranian legislator to take a certain position for stabilizing the concept of contractual unconscionability, determining the obvious regulations, elements and examples thereof.