روﯾﮑﺮد ﻋﻠﻤﺎي ﺣﻘﻮق و آراي ﻗﻀﺎﯾﯽ اﯾﺮان در ﺧﺼﻮص ﻧﻈﺮﯾﻪ ﻋﺪم ﭘﯿﺶ ﺑﯿﻨﯽ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺗﻄﺒﯿﻘﯽ در ﺣﻘﻮق ﻓﺮاﻧﺴﻪ

The Approach of Iranian Legal Scholars and Judicial Decisions Regarding the Theory of Imprevision with a Comparative Study in French law

در ﻧﻈﺎم ﺣﻘﻮﻗﯽ ﻓﺮاﻧﺴﻪ ﺑﺮ اﺳﺎس ﻧﻈﺮﯾﻪ ﻋﺪم ﭘﯿﺶﺑﯿﻨﯽ، ﺗﻌﺪﯾﻞ ﻗﻀﺎﯾﯽ ﻗﺮارداد، در ﻓﺮض ﺑﺮﻫﻢ ﺧﻮردن ﺗﻮازن ﻗﺮارداد ﺑﺎ ﺣﺪوث ﺗﻐﯿﯿﺮ اﺳﺎﺳﯽ ﻧﺎﺷﯽ از ﺷﺮاﯾﻂ ﻏﯿﺮ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﭘﯿﺶﺑﯿﻨﯽ و ﭘﯿﺸﮕﯿﺮي ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﻣﺮﺳﻮمﺗﺮﯾﻦ راﻫﮑﺎر در ﻓﺮض ﺷﮑﺴﺖ ﻃﺮﻓﯿﻦ ﻗﺮارداد در روﻧﺪ ﻣﺬاﮐﺮات ﻣﺠﺪد ﻣﻄﺮح ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. در ﻧﻈﺎم ﺣﻘﻮﻗﯽ اﯾﺮان، ﻧﻈﺮﯾﻪ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﯽ در روﯾﮑﺮد ﺑﻌﻀﯽ از ﻋﻠﻤﺎي ﺣﻘﻮق و اﺧﯿﺮاً ﺑﺮﺧﯽ آراي ﻗﻀﺎﯾﯽ ﻣﻨﻌﮑﺲ ﺷﺪه، ﮐﻪ ﺑﺎ اﺳﺘﻨﺎد ﺑﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ اراده ﻣﺸﺘﺮك ﻃﺮﻓﯿﻦ، ﻗﺎﻋﺪه ﻻ ﺿﺮر، ﻗﺎﻋﺪه ﻋﺴﺮ و ﺣﺮج و ﻧﻈﺮﯾﻪ ﻏﺒﻦ ﺣﺎدث، ﻗﺎﻋﺪه ﺗﻌﺪﯾﻞ ﻗﻀﺎﯾﯽ ﻗﺮارداد ﯾﺎ ﻓﺴﺦ آن، در ﻓﺮض ﺣﺪوث ﺷﺮاﯾﻂ ﻧﻈﺮﯾﻪ ﻋﺪم ﭘﯿﺶﺑﯿﻨﯽ ﺷﮑﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ اﺳﺖ؛ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ در اﯾﻦ ﺧﺼﻮص ﻣﻘﺮرات ﺻﺮﯾﺤﯽ وﺟﻮد ﻧﺪارد.

Although in jurisprudence the reference to the theory of Imprevision is relatively limited, but nevertheless some rules and principles of jurisprudence such as the rule of hardship, new swindling and harmlessness in justifying such theories have been cited by legal writers. Although some jurists have equated the harmlessness, hardship and new swindling rules with the theory of Imprevision in French law, a distinction must be made between the above rules and the theory of Imprevision. However, the theory of hardship has enough consistency to resolve the troublesome situation of unpredictability and prevention until the ambiguity is resolved and a new rule is enacted. In other words, judicial modification or revocation of the contract, like the theory of non-contingency after the amendments to the French Civil Code, can be deduced from the rule of hardship.