عزت الله گنج خانلو

Individuals may enter into negotiations with other persons with the aim of depriving the negotiating party of the opportunity to do business with them. The parties may also misuse the technical and professional information provided by the contracting party and make it available to its competitors or make a profit by using it. All of this happens in the pre-contract phase. In the past, when the principle of contractual freedom was accepted as absolute, individuals were not held responsible for the above actions. Because everyone had the right to stop negotiations and not to enter into a contract. On the other hand, the negotiating parties have voluntarily entered into a risky process and accepted the possible losses in order to make a profit. As a result, they do not have the right to claim damages from the other party. But over time, the needs and changes of modern society and specialized sales on the one hand and the unethical competition of merchants on the other hand led to the adjustment of this approach and lawyers each with their own theorizing, try to make law more ethical and Recognition of pre-contractual liability, the result of which is evident in their domestic law and international treaties.

In many countries pupils and staff of schools are at risk from a variety of accidents. Contract of educational insurance is one of the ways to compensate for school accidents. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare educational insurance contracts in legal system of England and Iran. The study was a comparatively qualitative research with non-emergent design. Method of data collection was documentary and data analyzed in accordance with the rule of "maximum variety” and principle of saturation. Findings showed that there is a similarity between both insurance systems of England and Iran in terms of following business principles (based on increasing profits and reducing losses) in estimating the damage caused by school accidents. The findings also reveal that in Iran, there is a monopoly on concluding a contract with an insurance company with a lack of diversity in the provision of services. In England, insurance companies are competitively seeking to extend their insurance contracts with schools. The research findings also highlighted the difference between the Iran insurance system and England in the following cases: Policy of maximum support for the injured person, efforts to reduce the costs of insurance company, legal system intervention policy (presence of lawyers) to protect the injured person and a "No Win - No Fee" support policy for the benefit of students and school staff. Based on these findings, it is suggested to policy makers in the Iran education system that the monopoly of concluding a contract with only one insurance company should be canceled and competitive insurance policies be applied in favor of injured students/staff and schools.