Civil Partnership agreement is one of the common methods of allocating resources and granting facilities in the country's Banking system, which is based on the Partnership of capital owners. The standard nature of the form has led to the inclusion of conditions that unilaterally serve the interests of the bank and the rights of the customer are ignored. These conditions, known as "imposed conditions", are the subject of this article and it has been tried to identify the meaning and examples of these conditions in Civil Banking Partnership agreements and based on jurisprudential and legal principles, the case Be analyzed and evaluated. The results of the present study, which was done by descriptive-analytical method, show that these conditions have been formulated without using the real results of the principle of sovereignty of the will, and in them, no place has been considered for the free will of the facility applicant. In addition, the mentioned conditions have violated the principle of justice and fairness, which is one of the basic principles of jurisprudential rules and the basis of conscience and unauthorized exchange contracts.

Efforts were made to design and implement usury-free Banking in Iran through the law of usury-free Banking operations. One of the ways to deal with usury in this law is the design of Partnership contracts, which include Civil Partnership, legal Partnership, mudarabah, mazarah and masakat. Each of these contracts has certain legal challenges that need to be taken into consideration. The main purpose of this research is to examine the jurisprudence of the Civil Partnership contract and analyze its jurisprudential challenges with the ijtihad method. Also, some of the most important implementation challenges in the country's Banking system have also been examined. The results of the research indicate that the most important and basic jurisprudential challenge of this contract is to change the jurisprudential nature of the company contract from a Partnership contract to an exchange contract. In the criticism of the provisions of the contract, 13 jurisprudential problems have been raised, the most important of which are problems such as the customer's voluntary management of the company's property, the obligation to compensate for damages, the obligation to purchase the company by the customer, the responsibility to compensate for the loss caused by legal action, and mortgage before proof of debt. , guaranteeing the trustee and committing to pay possible expenses. The most important implementation challenges are the risk of bad choice, regulatory problems, calendar and valuation of non-cash capital and changing economic conditions and market risk. In this regard, in order to solve the mentioned problems and make optimal use of the capacity of the Partnership contract, it was suggested that in addition to reforming the channels of money entering the bank through amending contracts and training and justifying employees, managers and people, the channels of money entering the Banking system should also be separated. This will increase the expertise of banks in certain areas and increase the quality of their work.

Field and Aims: The Partnership contracts are one of the obvious methods for allocating the resources in without usury Banking and the purpose of Partnership contract is "contribution contract" in juridical books which the parties by merging each other’, s properties and capitals, agree to cooperate in a specific business and share the profit and loss between themselves in proportion to their portion. However, in practice banks use a category of contracts to decrease the risk of repayment of such loans, increase of profit and avoid from imperative profit rate. Method: The present research was carried out using a descriptive and analytical method. Finding and Conclusion: added some conditions in the contracts of guarantee, settlement of account, donation and etc. in order to reach the fixed rate of profit they expect in exchange contracts in the form of Partnership. Including such conditions in such a contracts lead to substantive exit of contract from common definition of Partnership contract. But the operation of banks in economic analysis of law is nothing except to try to earn profit and avoid loss based on the theory of reasonable behavior in economy. So, it seems the first step to amend this defective cycle is consider the problem of inflation and decrease of value of money as one of the facts in country's economy. The solution is to finance Partnership projects by Banking investment funds or it is independent from banks.

In Banking Partnership contracts, economic activity takes place between the bank and the customer. In this activity, the bank seeks to bear less risk, and what is implemented in banks as these contracts is different from what the legislator has called Partnership. In order to achieve their goal, which is to reduce risk for their own benefit, banks sometimes include conditions that are contrary to the essence of the Partnership contract, that is, conditions that conflict with the customer's real intention, in the Partnership contract, and sometimes they upset the balance of the contract by adding unfair conditions that apparently follow the principle of correctness and are concluded based on correct contractual principles, but inwardly they are considered imposed conditions and the customer has inevitably agreed to accept them. Therefore, the acceptance of such conditions by the customer undermines the principle of justice and creates distrust between economic actors and banks, and as a result, corruption in the monetary and Banking system. Therefore, it seems that banks do not have the structural and functional capabilities in accordance with Islamic and legal requirements. The present study, by examining the raised objections, examines these conditions and their examples in Banking contracts and offers solutions to improve and overcome the current situation in Banking Partnership contracts. For example, instead of including conditions that are contrary to the nature of the Partnership contract or unfair conditions in Banking Partnership contracts, by specializing banks that have the ability to monitor and perform better in these contracts in these areas, and by phasing the allocation of profits in Partnership contracts, the risk of banks is reduced and the Banking model is improved in this regard

Collaborative Banking as a type of Islamic Banking model has been a matter of consideration among many Islamic finance theoreticians. This type of Banking has faced many challenges in theory and practice for which some solutions have been presented. One theoretical challenge has been the inability to reassure risk-averse investors, whereas this is one of the most important functions of conventional Banking. In fact, this function contradicts the nature of collaborative Banking; hence a malfunction. This research intends to answer how this malfunction can be corrected in the financial system so that we could benefit from the participation and financial potential of risk-averse investors, with a final presentation of the “solid Partnership model”. This model differentiates between reassuring functions on the one hand and the investors’ and investees’ Partnership on the other, so that funding institutions will do the function of Partnership, and risk-covering instruments will do the function of reassuring. The final achievement of this study is that a combination of Partnership institutions and risk-covering instruments can contribute to the model in which participation will be considered as a major Islamic Finance system and at the same time risk-averse investors’ needs will be recognized.

One of the common contracts in the Islamic Banking system is the Civil Partnership contract adopted from voluntary trade Partnership in Imamiah jurisprudence. According to Article 7 of Civil Partnership contract, taken from their participation in the Central Bank’ s Civil Partnership model, that was approved in 2013, the responsibility for managing the company's affairs is voluntarily (gratuitously) on the partner under the supervision of the bank and based on the agreed upon documents. As in voluntary trade Partnership (properties Partnership) and consequently, in the Civil participation contract, the agent is entitled to be paid, gratuitousness of the bank partner agency in the Civil Partnership contract will question its legitimacy. Therefore, the investigation of the authenticity and legitimacy of such a condition of the above mentioned contract is of paramount importance. In the present research, which was conducted using descriptive analytical method, it was found that the gratuitous contract is contrary to the Islamic law and the nature of the contract. As a result, it is void and will turn the nature of the Civil contract into a prohibited loan based on the religious norms.

A defining characteristic of the Civil Partnership contract is the joint ownership of partners’ assets, which is intrinsically linked to the legal concept of authorization (permission). Consequently, the revocation of authorization results in an abrupt cessation of economic interactions within this legal framework, leading to harmful outcomes such as the loss of benefits derived from the shared assets during an indefinite suspension. This situation increases the likelihood of premature and detrimental dissolution of the Partnership. Existing solutions, which reflect a dual nature combining the binding effect of joint ownership contracts and the permissibility of agency contracts, fail to effectively address the adverse consequences of revoking authorization. Furthermore, deeming the Civil Partnership contract as binding conflicts with the fundamental principle of cooperation and collaboration that forms the foundation of this legal institution. This study, employing a library-based analytical approach, demonstrates that the harmful effects of revoking authorization arise from the permissive nature attributed to the Civil Partnership contract, which is clearly inconsistent with Islamic jurisprudential-legal rules and economic efficiency. To resolve these contradictions, it is proposed that where revocation of authorization would result in the loss of benefits from jointly owned assets and cause harm, the principle of Lā ḍarar (no harm) should be invoked. According to the principle of Lā ḍarar (no harm), the implicit condition of continuous and proper use of jointly owned property, the principle of upholding the contract, the condition of maintaining contractual balance, and the interpretation and supplementation of explicit and implicit contractual terms based on economic efficiency, the permission (authorization) is presumed to remain in effect until it is terminated without causing harm.

One of the bank contracts which is significant in both allocation and equipping of sources is limited Partnership contract. The agent in this contract is considered as trustee and his claim on termination of stock without being excess or negligent is accepted. He would be agent‘s associate in both benefits and losses. Therefore this contract won’t have an economic justification in Banking operations, so in order to keep limited Partnership contract in Banking contracts and also put the liability of stock on the agent, the Islamic researchers have suggested some solutions like condition of liability to be brought as an implicit alternative contract. However, two aspects are to be considered for validity of condition of liability; first, it should not be against the exigency of the contract of liability and second it should not be opposing with Quran and narrations. Although some are arguing about the nullity of condition of liability if it is against the exigency of contract, we will try to review and discuss about that theory based on narrations and approaches of lawyers and Islamic scholars and finally we would suggest a new theory which is called “disaccord of condition of liability with Quran in limited Partnership contract”.

The main challenge faced in the execution of Civil Partnership contracts within the usury-free Banking system has turned to be a Shariah concern in the recent years, which is turned hindered the realization of the Banking system's strategic objectives for economic development in Iran. While legal Partnership contracts do not have any of the problems of Civil Partnership contracts, banks have been deprived of the advantages of these contracts due to the limitations imposed by supervisory authorities. The present research aims primarily to present the Banking system with a model based on utilization of the benefits of legal Partnership contracts; the key feature being the realization of real profit and loss. This will pave the way for the realization of strategic goals of the Banking system; i.e. the cooperation of the Banking system with real economy and expediting economic growth and development. Research hypotheses are:1. It is necessary to revive legal Partnership contracts in the Banking system; and2. With the help of legal Partnership contracts, PLS Banking model is presentable.The methodology employed to test the hypothesis is descriptive-analytical which includes a case study of Sepah Bank performance in legal Partnership contracts, accompanied by a documentary study of valid sources as well as legal documents of related authorities.The study of Sepah Bank performance in legal Partnership contracts shows a real profit of 30% as well as the creation of infrastructures for many industries including but not limited to: steel, cement, tires, roads and construction. Benefits of the utilization of legal Partnership contracts for depositors, credit institutions, and most importantly for the realization of strategic goals of national economy have made the revival of these contracts for the Banking system to be inevitable. The present paper presents practical models for the enforcement of legal Partnership.

One of the strong points of Islamic Banking, compared to conventional Banking system, is the bank's sharing of both profits and losses of funded activities in the framework of collaborative agreements. The proper implementation of Partnership facilities requires respecting religious as well as financial and economic codes. As shown by the evidence, the objections made against the activities of Islamic Banking in granting Partnership facilities confirm banks’ inability to respect the religious and legal codes of such facilities. Therefore, proposing methods to help Islamic banks implement Partnership facilities properly has always attracted the attention of Islamic financing experts. One of the markets that can assist Banking systems in the proper implementation of Partnership facilities is capital market.This descriptive-analytical study was carried out using library resources. It aimed at verifying this hypothesis: "Project-based funding can assist banks in the proper implementation of Partnership facilities through the three stages of demand assessment, monitoring and implementation, and audition and clearance." In fact, this type of interaction between project-based funding and Islamic Banking not only facilitates banks' participation in various economic sectors in order to grant participation facilities, but also prepares the ground for the funds to collect money through charging for Banking services.