A Comparative Study of the Right to Imprisonment in Jurisprudence, Iranian Law and the International Sale Convention

In general, the main basis of all exchanges is based on mutual obligations of the parties, so to achieve this symmetry, which arises from the solidarity of the parties and the obligations, the legislator has allowed each party to the contract until the other party fulfills its obligation. He has not done so, he can also refuse to fulfill the obligation, which is interpreted as the right to imprisonment. The right to imprisonment is one of the rights that often arises in exchange transactions, and according to it, each of the parties to the contract can postpone the fulfillment of its obligation to fulfill the obligation of the other party. Also because the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, on the one hand, seeks to establish a new international economic system and, on the other hand, seeks to remove legal barriers to international trade and to rely on conflict-of-law rules. Due to the differences in these rules in different countries, it is not helpful to study the articles of this convention on various issues, in which regard, it seems useful to address the issue of "right to imprisonment" in the sale in accordance with the convention and domestic law. Therefore, due to the importance of this study, with the aim of comparative study of the right to imprisonment in jurisprudence, Iranian law and the International Sale Convention has been done in the form of a library review study and the necessary data and information by reviewing various books and searching sites and Authentic websites are done. Accordingly, the scope and conditions of the exercise of the right to imprisonment in Iranian law and the Convention on the International Sale of Goods are examined in this article.

Keywords:

right to imprisonment , civil rights , international sale convention , goods , Iran