بررسي فقهي تأثير متقابل اقاله و حق شفعه بر يكديگر

Jurisprudential investigation of interplay of cancelling of the contract and pre-emption on each other

شفعه عملي حقوقي است كه شارع آن را بنا بر مصالحي براي احد شركاء مال مشاع، تحت شرايطي به تبع عقد بيعي كه في مابين احد شركا و ثالث منعقد مي‌گردد به رسميت شناخته است. از آنجايي كه ممكن است اين عقد تحت تاثير رضايت طرفين مورد اقاله قرار گيرد و اين رهگذر مبيع به ملكيت بايع و ثمن به ملكيت مشتري باز گردد، دو حالت به وجود خواهد آمد، حالت اول جايي است كه قبل از اعمال حق شفعه توسط شفيع اقاله صورت مي گيرد و در حالت دوم بعد از اعمال حق شفعه اقاله صورت مي‌گيرد. مشهور فقها بر اين اعتقادند كه چون حق شفعه به مجرد عقد بيع به وجود مي‌آيد و به عنوان يك حق مكتسب براي شفيع خواهد بود اقاله بعدي نمي تواند بر آن تاثير گذاشته و موجب از بين رفتن آن گردد بلكه اين حق شفعه است كه اگر بعد از اقاله صورت گيرد باعث رفع اقاله مي گردد. در مقابل اين قول برخي از فقها نيز معتقدند كه چون با اقاله مبيع به ملكيت بايع باز مي گردد بنابراين محلي براي حق شفعه باقي نمي ماند زيرا مجراي حق شفعه آن است كه حصه مبيعه در تملك مشتري باشد

Dre-emption is a right that lawgiver under a condition has recognized it of an interests for one of the jointly-owned proprietary ,which the source of it ; is a contract of sale that is concluded between the one of the partners and third parties, since this contract may cancelled of the contract by the affected of mutual agreement , and through sales get returned to the proprietary of the seller and the price go back to the proprietary of the purchaser, there will be two situation, the first situation is a where cancelling of the contract gets before the actions of the per-emption by middleman and in the second situation cancelling of the contract gets after the pre-emption . Most jurisprudents believe that because creation of pre-emption arises as soon as the contract of sale and it as an earned right will be to the middleman ; the next cancelling of the contract can not affect it and causing it to be destroyed rather, it is pre-emption that if it be done after the cancelling of contract causes the resolve of the cancelling of contract .Against this statement , some of jurists also believe that sinse it get returned to the proprietary of the seller object of sale the cancelling of contract ; so does not remain local for the pre-emption because it's the parts of pre-emption that parts of selling owned by the purchaser