جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "secured transactions" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

Although the priority of secured rights seems absolute and inviolable, the study of new approaches of legal systems shows that the priority is also affected by economic or legal interests. In this view, by separating the effects of secured transactions into two levels of parties and others, in some special circumstances, the contract is effective only in the relationship between the parties and is considered unenforceable to others or the Hierarchy of priority is adjusted and changed by law. This article intends to explain the reasons and basics for this deviation from the rule in other legal systems and then examine the jurisprudence of Islam and some Muslim countries to examine the position of Iranian law. As a result, it is safe to say that despite the existence of some theoretical capacities in jurisprudence, the approach of Iranian law with the issue is simple and far from macro-legal measures. The subject of this article reveals another consequence of not paying attention to the validity of official documents and making it mandatory in legal relations. Therefore, the only advantage of the Secured transactions law in legal system of Iran is the ease of analysis and implementation of criteria; without special measures being taken for their efficiency.

In Legal Terminology, Collateral is as back of loan repayment or for obligation responsibility. Despite that Collateral in economics has different functions. In this paper we focus on Economic functions of Secured Transaction, and its role in Microeconomics and Macroeconomics.The Economic efficiency of the collateral is cleared by economic analysis and the theory of efficient breach that comprehensive secured transaction is able to make efficientallocation of goods and services and finally strong economic functions. In studying this collaterally Institution we get that this formality can effect on positive role in economic development by access to credit easily. So for  increasing Economic officiency of secured Transaction, we need to revise  our laws and regulations that have been mentioned in international reports about this approach.

Legal systems occasionally strive to meet the needs of applicants who are seeking credit by creating security devices based on the type of property, type of debt and even the way the debt has been imposed upon which gives rise to complexities in the legal systems governing secured transactions and rendering them impractical and sometimes only one security device is introduced to fulfill all demands made by applicants throughout all sectors while this measure is taken with inclusiveness and flexibility. In this paper, the two mentioned approaches are called Pluralism and Unitarianism and by examining them in the two legal systems of the US and England, we’ve answered the question in the Iran’s law that whether with respect to the mortgage contract regulations in the Civil Code of Iran and other existing miscellaneous laws and rules, specifically in the banking field which is in a distance from the mortgage contract regulations, there are numerous means for collateralizing properties and hence the pluralism approach is dominant or whether all the subject matters are categorized under the same title and therefore the Unitarianism approach is dominant. The result is that in the United States legal system and within the framework of Article 9 UCC Unitarianism, and in the England system, with various devices of security, pluralism prevails. Mortgage contract is the only security device in our country’s legal system and all the regulations passed so far are in place to moderate the traditional rules governing this devices. Therefore, our country’s legal system’s position is Unitarianism. However, this state of Unitarianism is incomplete and limited and there should be created an inclusive and all-directional system for secured transactions by amending the existing regulations in order for optimizing the efficiency of the mentioned system.