محمد صالحی مازندرانی

Based on extending conditions of validity of a contract (Article 190 of the Civil Code) to unilateral legal acts and also the criterion considered Article 191, termination of marriage and return to it, are formed with the expressed intention and consent; That is, the inner and outer will both. In contracts the announcement of the offer seems obvious; but in unilateral legal acts such as termination of marriage and return to it, what is the rule? In this article, we examine this question; Whenever one of the spouses terminates the marriage without informing the other party or returning to the redemption (fedyah) by wife without informing the other, and the time expires, are these unilateral legal acts valid or its effect depends on the information? In this analytical study based on the principles of jurisprudence, we conclude that although notification has no role in the conclusion of unilateral legal act, it does play a main role in its effectiveness

It is common in commercial contracts to contain the prohibition clause on assignment. Regarding the condition of prohibition on assignment of contractual rights in English law, two views have been developed. “The Property view” and “the Contract view”. The Property view gives primacy to the freedom of the parties to fashion the rights they bring into existence, so if they wish, they can extinguish the inherent transferability of this right. So, if an assignment happens, it will have no legal effect and will be void. But according to the contract view, prohibition on assignment merely operates at the level of contract and does not characterize contractual rights because parties cannot use contract to modify those attributes of contractual rights that the law of property gives to them. One of those attributes is that they are transferable. So according to contract view, a no-assignment clause doesn’t void the assignment, but operates as a matter of contract, conditioning the duty to perform so the obligation of the obligor to perform is executed only against his contracting party (assignor). In this view, in case of an assignment, the assignee will never have a direct legal relationship with the obligor. In Iranian law, there are three opinions about the prohibition clause; ineffective, void and Invalid against the obligor. “Void” seems to be compatible with the property view and “invalidity against obligor” is compatible with the contractual view in English law. Finally, due to the flaws expressed in the contractual view, we will come to the conclusion that the property view is more consistent with the prevailing legal rules, the real intention of the parties and the custom of the merchants.

Generally, courts may encounter two types of lawsuits against judges: firstly, Lawsuit for compensation due to wrong decision, secondly, Criminal and disciplinary lawsuit resulting from a harmful Adverse due to judicial decision. Here, in this article, it is striven to answer the following question: if a lawsuit is filed in the courts against a harmful decision, whether there is a special procedure for dealing with such a lawsuit, or the courts should follow the procedure the General rules for dealing with claims. In the current study compiled in a descriptive-analytical manner with a comparative approach in the laws of Arabic countries, Roman Germanic and Common Law, the results will be depicted as follow. if the lawsuit is of the first type, the procedures for dealing with latter type of lawsuit are the same as other civil liability and torts for lawsuits that are subject to the General rules of procedure; however, in the case of the second, on the one hand, any judge of the courts has a lot of authority and powers in their field of work; therefore, it is necessary for them to be responsible before all these legal authority so that they do not become absolute rulers. On the other hand, the security and independence of the judge requires that the filing of a lawsuit against her is different with the general rules of responsibility and prosecution. This, in all legal systems, a special procedure has been provided for dealing with these claims.

The conditions surrounding the transfer of ownership can include priority or delay, either from the contract's inception or its dissolution, indicating a retroactive impact. This article explores the validity of such conditions within domestic law and the legal frameworks of various countries. In the context of Iranian law, support for the validity of these conditions can be found in instances of violating the causal and consequential rule in financial and legal matters. Additionally, common sense and the perspectives of renowned jurists align with the notion that such conditions do not contradict Sharia.   The priority condition for transferring ownership from the contract's dissolution (retroactive condition) is widely accepted in legal systems. Fundamentally, this condition is akin to prioritizing ownership transfer from the contract's inception. If the latter is deemed valid, the former should be as well. Concerning delayed ownership transfer, if the transfer is pending, it is considered a form of suspension, which is generally deemed acceptable. In cases where ownership transfer is suspended for a specific duration, known as postponement, and if permanence is not a fundamental ownership condition, this condition is typically deemed unproblematic.

In the realm of financial transactions, the customary exchange of money serves as the foundation, aiming to satisfy the needs and requirements of each party involved. In this context, the mastery of rights by both buyers and sellers becomes imperative. However, situations may arise where, before the property is handed over to the buyer, it is destroyed due to unforeseeable events beyond the seller's control. In such cases, the transaction deviates from the parties' intentions and customary practices. If, during this transaction, the seller has already received payment, Article 387 of the Civil Code mandates the return of the funds to the buyer. This reimbursement is contingent on the non-transfer of the property that was originally part of the sale. Moreover, the goods being traded might possess inherent interests separate from the primary property, complicating the status of these additional interests. Article 387 of the Civil Code only addresses the seller's obligation to refund the transaction funds to the buyer, revolving around the concept of the "destruction of the object of sale before delivery." Nevertheless, this legal provision does not explicitly delineate the consequences of such annulment. As a result, a degree of ambiguity emerges when dealing with this scenario. Jurists, recognizing this gap in the law, have delved into this issue, seeking clarity and resolution. This matter has spurred extensive debates in both Imamiyyah and Sunni jurisprudence, leading to varying interpretations. Some scholars, in their attempt to explain the effects of annulment, have created an alternative rule known as "advantages and interests of an object follows the risk." This rule aims to mitigate the ambiguity surrounding the annulment of pledge agreements. Additionally, some scholars have posited that property ownership temporarily reverts to the seller, highlighting that during this brief period, the seller is obligated to refund the transaction amount. However, all these perspectives converge on the idea that the property ultimately belongs to the buyer, with the benefits and interests inextricably tied to the buyer's claim. This viewpoint contradicts the Shariah rule of "advantages and interests of an object follows the risk," a principle upheld by the Prophet of Islam, which places the responsibility for benefits and interests on both the buyer and the seller. It is important to note that the rule of "advantages and interests of an object follows the risk" is divinely ordained, whereas the rule of the "destruction of the object of sale before delivery" stems from scholarly interpretation. This stark contrast highlights a fundamental conflict in unassigned law: the ownership status of benefits. The preference for the sharia rule of "advantages and interests of an object follows the risk" over the rule of "destruction of the object of sale before delivery" dictates that the benefits continue to belong to the seller, aligned with the remaining property's ownership status. Furthermore, the acceptance of the rule of "advantages and interests of an object follows the risk" in relation to "commandite" has been acknowledged in civil law through extensive jurisprudential studies. Consequently, it has been established that adhering to the benefits guaranteed to each party in a properly executed agreement, where both parties maintain control over the property involved, is considered legally valid and representative. In conclusion, this research underscores the necessity of upholding the benefits guaranteed by the law, as clarified in articles 387 and 558 of the Civil Code. It establishes that the determination of benefits for each party in a contract hinges on the guarantee bestowed upon them, as defined by the explicit language of the law and jurisprudence. This theory posits that one benefits from the guarantee and bears the responsibility for any loss incurred in connection with the property. This novel theory, developed through extensive analysis of the Civil Code's articles, provides a unique perspective that has not been explored in previous legal studies.

Option belongs to the category of rights, not obligations, and therefore it can be terminated. The notion of terminating an option before the contract refers to eliminating the cause and necessity of the option right, rather than nullifying it after its creation. There is uncertainty regarding the capability of stipulating the termination of an option before the contract in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian positive law. The stipulation for the termination of an option before the contract may take the form of a separate agreement regarding the option, an independent condition concerning the option, or even an incidental provision other than the contract that includes the option right. Based on the findings of the present descriptive-analytical study, considering the evolved jurisprudential developments, it is possible and acceptable to stipulate the termination of an option before the contract in each of the aforementioned forms in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law. However, the existing civil law regulations in this regard are incomplete and ineffective, and their modification, from the perspective of a general definition of conditions that also encompasses pre-contractual conditions, the acceptance of the stipulation for the termination of the option before the contract, the expression of various forms of its legal implications, and ultimately the determination of essential instances of options, is necessary.

Complete and correct implementation of the bank transfer process, with the aim of performing of obligation, although it removes the responsibility of the bank; However, it has no correlation to acquittal the debtor. The purpose of the research is to resolve legal ambiguities and loopholes, as well as the context of passing a comprehensive law in domestic law.  And the research method is descriptive and analytical. The question is, how can the implementation of the bank transfer relieve the bank of its responsibility, yet it has no correlation to acquittal the debtor? In this study we will prove, in accordance with the principles and rules governing Iranian law, the International Law on Transfer of Credit, as well as the US Commercial Uniform Law and other international regulations and documents Non-liability of the bank is based on the principle of separation or independence of bank transfer of funds of the basic obligations, That is the bank's obligation is merely the correct execution of the payment order, and the legal issues surrounding the basic obligation for which the payment order was issued are not related to the bank; And the reason for the discharge between the realization of the bank transfer of funds and the discharge of the transferor is that the fulfillment of the obligation in the form of bank transfer of funds, in addition to the correct implementation of the transfer of funds, requires other conditions.

The nature of the judiciary requires the issuance of untrue and harmful verdicts, which are mostly unintentional and due to the judge's error, and on the other hand, according to special provisions, such as Article 171 of the Constitution of the Republic of Iran and general rules such as Damage is a matter of course. However, the ambiguity in this article, which has been overlooked in legal proceedings, is this; If the injured party intends to file a lawsuit due to a wrong judicial decision and seeks compensation, in which court should he file a lawsuit and which court has the inherent jurisdiction to hear this matter ?and what is the nature of the lawsuit against the judge? Is the lawsuit merely a civil liability with the compensation as its purpose, or one of the unusual ways of protesting the issued verdict? In this research, which is done by analyzing legal jurisprudential data, we state that the nature of the lawsuit against the judge varies according to the court, which has the nature of civil responsibility and sometimes a disciplinary one. On the other hand, although the lawsuit has two stages and first the Aggrieved must prove the judge's mistake or guilt in the disciplinary court of judges, in the next stage, the competent court to hear compensation is the general and revolutionary courts.

The civil law has not taken any action regarding the sanctity of the condition of legal omission, and this has caused a difference of opinion among the jurists. Some have commented on the annulment, some on the validity, and others on the invalidity of the legal act of impermissible (forbidden) act. This research tries to strengthen the recent theory and for this purpose, suggests the theory of arbitrary (contractual, credit) coercion. According to this theory, the sanction of the person who is responsible to perform a condition which is against him (Arabic: مشروط علیه) and he/she violated that condition in this type of condition, according to the primary rule is compelling and the impossibility of the coercion (compelling) of the person who is responsible to perform a condition is not imagined; because, the coercion (compelling) of the person who is responsible to perform a condition is arbitrary (contractual), which means that the legal act of impermissible (forbidden) act is concluded in a contractual way. In other words, coercion must be of the form of the desired act, and since the mentioned act is arbitrary (contractual, credit), the manner of coercion must also be arbitrary. This coercion (compulsion) without the need to perform any material or legal action is done spontaneously. Coercion has been realized, when, there is no effect legally on the person who is responsible to perform a condition which is against him and promised it, and there is no need for any further action. Accepting the validity of the forbidden legal act, in addition to the inconsistency with the intention of the parties, means the permission to the breach of contract and the effective termination of the contract. The theory of nullity is also incompatible with the foundations of our legal system.

Termination is one of the remedies, or otherwise said warrants, available to the reprieved party in the event that a contract is breached.  Employing a descriptive-analytical method, the present study investigates such a remedy as provided in Imamiyah jurisprudence, as well as Iran and international legal documents. The concept is celebrated across the legal systems, yet there are certain differences inherent to it in Islamic law and international documents. Vehemently stipulated in the Imamiyah, it is incumbent upon the obliged party to perform the subject of a contract, hence, a right to termination of the contract is not reserved. Rooted in Imamiyah jurisprudence, Iran’s law of contracts enshrines the performance of the obligation in the first place, and a right to terminate the contract should the possibilities for the coercion upon the obliged party be rare. Contrary to Iran’s law in which the right to termination falls subsequent to performance of an obligation, the two are accessible alongside each other for the obliged party to choose from in the international legal documents. In other words, as for the termination of the contract, there is no need for a request earlier to (non)performance of the obligation.

According to Article 691 of the civil law, "dayn guarantees that have not yet been established are invalid." The jurists, following the jurists, tried to interpret them. Due to the establishment of dayn.they carefully tried to follow the word "cause" in addition to some jurists, in addition to its true meaning, that is, appropriate, so that the conventional tradition would be in accordance with the legal regulations. Although the existing custom and custom can be somewhat decisive, since this dispute is not resolved in jurisprudence and law, and the fegh is silent, according to Article 167 of the Constitution, the ruling must be determined on the basis of fegh standards. The results of the research, according to the rules and principles of legal jurisprudence, as well as the combination between the concept of M691 and M697, indicate that the guarantee of the future dayn of the researcher is considered correct and there is a balance between the guarantee of the future dayn and the actual existence.And insisting on the invalidation of the guarantee of the possible future dayn of the product, given that it has become a social necessity, causes the system to be disrupted.

Artificial intelligence has entered many areas of human life and has posed new legal challenges. Having legal personality is one of the theories in managing these challenges that has been proposed to justify the contracts concluded by intelligent systems based on the theory of representation on one side and the attribution of civil liability resulting from the activities of intelligent systems to the systems themselves on the other side. However, a coherent and comprehensive study is not conducted to harmonize the current rules of legal entities and its compliance with the features of intelligent agent. This article seeks to answer the adequacy or inadequacy of theoretical foundations and legal resources to identify legal personality for intelligent agent, which has been written in a descriptive-analytical method with a comparative study of Islamic jurisprudence, Iranian law and law of the West. The findings of this study show that each of these systems have significant theoretical foundations for having legal personality, but the status and characteristics of traditional legal entities are not equally applicable to the features of intelligent agent and if this structure not modified, the identification of legal personality for the systems, despite the alternative solutions, will cause legal confusion

The global spread of the Qovid 19 virus, described by the World Health Organization on January 31, 2020 as "an international threat and concern" has affected all aspects of contemporary life. In the meantie, several restrictive measures have been taken. It has been done by governments to limit and quarantine, which in turn has affected the implementation of contracts.

Considering whether it is possible to execute the contracts despite the cases of remaining execution, and only this disease causes problems that they are supposed to do.

The main question of the present study, which has been done descriptively-analytically, is what will be the status of contract implementation as a result of the corona outbreak? Secondly, what are the strategies to manage the implementation of contracts during the corona outbreak?

The result of the present study is that from a legal point of view, the corona outbreak can be adapted to three different doctrines, namely force majeure, frustration and hardship of contract execution. Since it is still possible to enforce contracts despite the prevalence of coronation, and only the outbreak of this disease has made it difficult to enforce contracts, the corona should be more in line with the doctrine of difficulty in enforcing contracts, or hardship.

One of the most effective ways to manage contract execution during the corona is to modify the contract.Please cite this article as:Salehi Mazandarni M, Gandomkar RH, Pourkarimi M. Analyzing the Effects of Corona Outbreaks on Contracts and Ahead Solutions. Medical Law Journal. 2022; 16(57): e31.

The authorization which basically causes permissibility (Arabic: اباحه) for the authorized person has an unstable nature which with the revocation of the authorizer (in the condition of the absence of inability to revoke) and in any case with one of parties’ death or hajr (Arabic: حجر meaning: the interdiction upon the incompetent person) it is ended (terminated). Whereas it is necessary in some cases that the authorization coincides with the feature of continuance and it is not simply destroyed (ruined) which causes the loss of the authorized. With examining in the Articles of the civil code of Iran and the opinions of the law and fiqh scholars this importance is revealed that the authorization is able to establish right for the authorized. The important features of this authorization are: inability of the authorizer to terminate it, the continuation of the allowed authorization even in the situation of the parties’ death or hajr (Arabic: حجر meaning: the interdiction upon the incompetent person), the capability of forceable or voluntary transfer of the established right, … The recognition of such foundationary (ta’sisi) requires the authorization at least in cases which create right is supposed a legal act if not the legal presumption of the authorization will not go along with (will not be congruent with) the acceptance of acquiring right.

Conclusion of codeshare agreement between international and domestic airlines at first was emerged as a way to advertising, but currently it is used as a strategic approach to gain market share and consequently creating a dominant position for airline services market. One of the legal issues of these agreements is doubt raised about their anti-competitive nature. The results of this research, that is a comparative study of the subject in related legal systems in a descriptive-analytic method, indicate that based on the type of the agreement and its specific characteristics, scope of activity and parties’ share in the market, both aspects-competitive and anticompetitive- are probable in these agreements. Furthermore, although competition law has no clear position as to these types of agreements in various legal systems, legally speaking, such agreements should be investigated case by case and a general rule should not be prescribed for all of their examples.

The authority of Bayyinah, i.e. the testimony of two righteous and just persons, is a jurisprudential necessity; however, there is disagreement about the basis of the authority of Bayyinah as to whether it is a matter of intent or proximity to Allah or about the number of witnesses as well as the gender of witness depending on the nature of dispute. In recent decades, equating the testimony of two women with the testimony of one man in the verse 282 of the Sura Al-Baqarah, due to women's forgetfulness and based on some narratives indicating their rational imperfection, has caused a lot of controversy. The question arises here as to what is the reason behind the inequality of testimony of woman and man and how the provisions of the above-said verse and narratives are justified? Regardless of the contradictive answer of accepting the testimony of one woman in certain cases, the authors will say in a descriptive-analytical study, far from unconventional interpretations: First, in jurisprudential literature, witnessing and testifying are not considered as rights to cause a defect in women’s rights. Second, testimony must be about tangible issues and it doesn’t relate to the intellect. In addition, the narratives containing the rational imperfection are contrary to verse 282. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the words in the context of their formation. Considering the evidence in the text of the narratives, the meaning of intellect is “reminding” and "ability to manage and administer the affairs which is an adventitious matter and the result of acquiring knowledge and experience”.

A guarantee contract is defined in Article 684 of the Civil Code as guaranteeing the debt of another person and according to Article 698, the guarantee causes the transfer of liability. In addition, according to Article 691, a religious guarantee for which the cause has not yet been clarified is void. It is stated from the above-mentioned articles that according to the legislator, the subject of the contract should be transferable to another person, which means that it must be general. As a result, it is not possible to guarantee a contract in the realm of material property due to its externality and partiality, as well as its irrevocability. The terms of the Civil Code are ambiguous in this regard, because on the one hand, it has chosen to transfer the liability and on the other hand, in Article 697, it has accepted the guarantee of responsibility, part of which is the guarantee of rejection of the material property. There is no common law that is decisive in the dispute, the dispute in jurisprudence has not been resolved, and the religious texts have not written anything about it. However, according to Article 167 of the Constitution of Iran, the ruling on the issue must be determined based on jurisprudential criteria. Therefore, the issue of the present study is whether, according to the rules of jurisprudential-legal principles, it is possible to guarantee a contract of guaranteed property. That is, whether there is a possibility of development in the concept of guarantee or not. The conclusion is that based on the jurisprudential-legal rules and principles, it is not necessary that the subject of the guarantee of the contract be general, so there is no problem to guarantee the material property.

Using fictional characters in the marketing and advertising of goods and services is one of the oldest and the best known form of merchandising with a multi-million dollar annual turnover. The fame and popularity of most fictional characters go far beyond their role in the original works which first featured. In addition, many characters are created outside the context of any particular work and may therefore remain without mechanism and law protection. So, ensuring fair protection to the creators and their owners against unauthorized profit from their creativity is necessary. This paper seeks to answer the question whether it is possible to delineate a position for fictional characters to pursue their independent lives from primary works in legal systems? To answer this question, through a descriptive and analytical approach and by following American law, the authors try to examine the capacity of copyright and trademark systems and the situation which characters enter into the public domain. Undoubtedly, explaining how to protect the fictional characters and their creators, as well as, exploring other aspects of this right, such as identifying infringement criteria and the public domain's contribution to these rights, in addition to assist the jurisprudence, will enhance cultural activities and augment the richness of Iranian legal literature.

By concluding a pre-sale contract, a part of the estates or land will be transferred to the pre-buyer for the purchased share. Pursuant to Article 1 of the Building Pre-Sale Code and other articles of this Code, the pre-sale contract, as a specific contract, along with other contracts, has the following characteristics: ownership, consent, exchange, necessary and exclusive. In Article 20 of the Building Pre-Sale Code, the legislator, while determining the competent authority for resolving disputes arising from the pre-sale contract and deeming it necessary to resolve the disputes of this contract through arbitration, also limits the authority of that authority for interpretation, interpretation and execution. The provisions of the contract have been determined. On the other hand, the same Code stipulates requirements for the parties to the contract, such as formally concluding the contract, appointing arbitrators and including the provision of Article 20 of the Code in the contract. That legislator's silence regarding the guarantee of non-compliance with the above-mentioned cases in arbitrating the subject matter of the Code has caused a dispute in the judicial procedure. Also, the lack of will of the parties in referring the principle of dispute to arbitration, raises suspicion that the true title of arbitration does not apply to the dispute resolution authority subject to Article 20 of the Code. The present article seeks to deal with the guarantee of the performance of the first forms along with justifying and explaining the nature of the dispute resolution authority of pre-sale contracts.

In accordance with privity of contract, a contract cannot confer rights or impose obligations to third parties; but, as a legal reality, a contract is invocable against third parties, and they cannot ignore its effect. The reverse of the mentioned situation is, also, true and third parties cannot affect a contract. Nonetheless, there is a borderline state in which a contract affects the third party’s potential right, although it does not directly confer rights or impose obligations. There are two theories to set out this situation: inoperativeness and non-opposability. Jurists have different opinions about the instances of, and the relation between, them. This article claims that they are the same. They both are created to protect the rights of third parties; in both states, the contract has effects between contracting parties and has no effect to third parties. Applying the third party’s right, according to circumstances, can dissolve the contract or does not affect it.

One well-known theory of government civil liability is that the government is immune to civil liability in face of harmful government actions.  In Iranian law, Article 11 of the Civil Liability Law evokes this theory, and therefore, most jurists and legal writers, citing this article and considering the jurisprudential and legal basis of the authority of the Islamic ruler and the government, believe that legal system and jurisprudence Imamiyya has recognized the theory of state immunity. This article seeks to understand the approach of Iranian law to the responsibility of the government resulting from the exercise of sovereignty and to critique the well-known opinion of jurists and legal writers.  In addition to a new review of Article 11 of the Civil Liability Law, as well as an analysis of the relationship between Article 11 of the Civil Liability Law and the Civil Code, the limits of the government's civil liability for harmful acts of governance are explained.  The legality, exceptionality and illegality of government liability are examined.  The results of this article show that contrary to the popular opinion of jurists and legal writers, despite the initial appearance of Article 11 of the Civil Liability Law, the theory of government immunity and illegality of responsibility of the government cannot be attributed to Iranian law and Imami jurisprudence.

The invalidity of the contract is directly linked to the economic order of society, and the nullity of contracts causes damage to parties and disrupts the economic order of Society. Therefore, in addition to adhering to general policies to consolidate trades and reduce uncertainty, some legal systems have foreseen mechanisms that, if canceled despite all the legal arrangements, would eliminate the uncertainty and bring it into the life cycle. One of these solutions is the theory of contract transformation, which is rooted in German law. This means that if the contract is invalid but inside a valid contract, the new contract is the criterion. The main challenge facing the theory of contract transformation entity is that after the transformation, the parties must be bound by the effects of the new contract which was not the result of their real will. According to this theory, contract development relies on the hypothetical will of the parties, which is inferred by the judge, on the basis of the terms of the contract and the circumstances governing it, and in particular the economic objectives beyond it. Unlike the laws of Germany and most of Arab countries, in Iranian law such an institution is not considered as a general rule, but numerous examples of its application are found in law and jurisprudence.

Interpretation is the method of law. It has sub methods. Any of these sub methods have basis and use technique that coordinate with its basis. One of the sub methods at law is the systematic method of interpretation. The major base of this method is to interpret a part of text in correspondence with the other parts so that the text’s coherence is preserved. One of these techniques that is used in this method is Inference to the best explanation. It includes three phases: to observe the facts and cases, to propose the theories and guesses to explain those cases and facts, to choose the best explanation through the rival theories. The best theory is that can explain more cases and be less complicated and have more consistency with the legal system. Inference to the best explanation is used in law very much though its name is less known. This inquiry tries to explain this way of argument logically and analyze its position at law and clarify its application by several instances.

At the process of the conclusion of the contract, the declaration of intention is usually made in the status words, but the parties may choose the words in the contract that contradict with the appearance of contract, but the other contract in the contract of void have. In this regard, some Arab countries with the pursuant of Germany legal system accepted the concept of transformation of contract. The main challenge of this theory is how may be intended a contract with words of a specific contract. This theory is based on the principle of the authenticity of the contract, the need to pay attention to the meanings of contract and goals of the parties and to support the theory of reliance. In fact, for the purpose of concluding a contract, the main element is the parties' of actual intention and the words used by them must be interpreted in accordance with it. In this conditions the second contract can regarded as a valid one.