The theory of disgorgement interest or in other words, disgorgement of the profits for breach of contract, is an American legal theory that is being applied in the American contract law and sometimes reflected in English case law. The primary principle of contractual compensation in the common law system is the Principle of Full Compensation. This principle, put the promise in as good a position as he would have been in if the contract had been performed. There have been many discussions about whether the injured person of the breach of contract (regardless of the damage he suffered) can ask for the disgorgement interest that the violator obtained from the breach of contract, and even in American law, although the judicial procedure has progressed towards the acceptance of this Principle (principle of full disgorgement), it cannot be said that this principle has been fully accepted. In English law, Some decisions show the relative acceptance of this principle. On the other hand, the theory of efficient breach, a product of the common law system, indicates the possibility of the breach of contract in cases where the breach of contract is so profitable that it puts both parties to the contract in a better position in addition to covering the losses suffered by the promisee. These two theories contradict themselves, so by accepting one of them in a legal system, it is difficult to accept and apply the other. This article has been carried out to examine the foundations and conflicts of each of these two theories and finally the possibility of accepting each of them in Iran's legal system. Research methodThe theory of Disgorgement of Profits for Breach of Contract is an unknown subject in Iranian law, therefore, in this article, an attempt has been made to open a new chapter regarding contractual damages by using foreign sources, including books, articles, and judicial procedure, and adapting it to the accepted laws and principles of Iran's legal system. Theoretical frameworkThe theory of the disgorgement interest (which requires the violator to return all or part of the profits obtained from the breach of contract) conflicts with the theory of efficient breach (which encourages the promisor to breach when the breach is profitable for him/her). Therefore, the theory of efficient breach is always considered an obstacle to accepting disgorgement of profits for breach of contract. In any legal system where the theory of efficient breach is fully accepted, there will be no opportunity for the disgorgement interest and vice versa. By examining the foundations of both theories, this article has tried to study the possibility of accepting each of them in Iranian law and the possible cases where the acceptance of one does not prevent the application of the other.  HypothesisThe most important hypothesis of this article is that "the theory of efficient breach cannot be accepted (except in exceptional cases), due to the legal resources of the Iranian legal system and since there is always the possibility of requiring the promisor to fulfill the promise by the promisee. On the other hand, there are many obstacles to accepting the disgorgement interest due to breach of contract in Iranian law". AchievementsThe theory of disgorgement of profits for breach of contract, or in other words, disgorgement damage and the theory of efficient breach, are both products of the common law system, none of them can be accepted absolutely, but the limited acceptance of each of these two theories will not be pointless due to the circumstances and conditions of each case. The theory of efficient breach has no place in any legal system that accepts the theory of disgorgement of profits for breach of contract. Nevertheless, efficient breach seems to be acceptable sometimes when it is not for profit, it is only to prevent more losses for the promisor, which in this case is not in conflict with the principles of contract law. On the other hand, the theory of disgorgement of profits for breach of contract when no loss has been caused to the promisee, although it may seem irrational at first sight, sometimes some circumstances make this restitution consistent with legal principles,Including in cases where the contract was concluded based on trust, or when conditions prevail that the expected damage cannot compensate the promisee in full. Since there is always the possibility of requiring the promisor to fulfill the promise as a guarantee of breach of contract in Iranian law, the theory of efficient breeach cannot be accepted,Except in cases where the violation is to prevent loss and not to gain profit. Also, due to the non-identification of damages for loss of prospective profits and, as a result, the principle of full compensation, disgorgement of profits for breach of contract cannot be considered as an accepted rule. Nevertheless, since the profits for breach of contract are obtained illegally and the effectiveness of the rights of the contracts requires that it be prevented from the exploitation of the breach, in some contracts, especially contracts where one of the parties has a fiduciary duty, and he benefits from the violation of this fiduciary duty can be done, and the usual methods of determining damages cannot compensate for the damage caused to the injured person, perhaps the amount of the infringer’s gain can be considered as a criterion for measuring damages.

Breach of contract may occur by the fault of party in breach. There is a variety of degrees in contractual fault and the highest degree of fault is intentional one. The breach of contract is considered to be intentional when the party in breach calculates the financial costs and benefits of the breach and then decides not to perform his/her contractual obligations. The notion of intentional breach and its consequences are recognized in common law and civil law and also in some European instruments such as PECL and DCFR. The intentionality of breach is considered to be relevant in above jurisdictions and instruments. For example, in the case of intentional breach, common law courts allowed the specific performance. They sometimes refused to mitigate the amount of penalty clauses and to recognize the exemption clauses in favor of the breaching party. Also, in civil law jurisdictions the intentional breach works as an allowance for unforeseeable damages. The hypothesis of this contribution is that in the case of intentional breach, courts must take a stricter approach than the usual breach and they should seek to improve the position of the creditor in terms of accessing to contractual remedies.

One of the interesting subjects in the United Nations Convention on International Sale of Goods- 1980 (CISG), is the issue of anticipatory breach of contract. According to this theory, if after the conclusion of a contract it becomes appear that one of the parties may not fulfill a substantial part of his obligations, or a fundamental breach of the contract may occur from his part, then the other party is entitled to suspend performance of his obligations, or to terminate the contract.This paper will deal with the question of suspension or cancellation of a contract due to an anticipatory breach in CISG, English law, and the U.S. law. Then compatibility of the Iranian law, as it is standing now, with this theory shall be examined.

Numerous models have been developed in the past decades to explain the complicated earth dams' berach phenomena. These have included physical as well as mathematical and computer models. Among the more widely used dam breach computer models over decades is the BREACH model. It is based upon erosion and soil mechanics equations, hydraulic and sediment transport laws. The difficulty in gathering data motivates one to use other powerful methods. In this study a new method has been developed for prediction of peak breach outflow and breach time through Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs). Toward this end, synthetic breach parameters of about 115 dams were developed by BREACH model, and then employed to train and test the neural networks. The performance of the network model is investigated through a change of input parameters. A most efficient and global model for assessing a dam breach potential is presented. Later, the most significant input parameters affecting dam breach are investigated. Best results were found with back propagation neural network using multiple hidden layers. The most compatible structure for breach outflow prediction possesses the correlation coefficients of 0.992 and 0.909 for training and testing, respectively. As for breach time, a structure was obtained with the correlation coefficients of 0.993 and 0.884 for training and testing, respectively. A forecast study was performed for the case of Mollasadra Dam. Comparisons between the artificial neural network results and dam BREACH model were made, the results indicating that neural networks are appropriate for predicting dam breach parameters.

In the law of international contracts, the suspension right remedy due to the anticipatory breach of contract has been accepted based on multiple foundations. Under this right, the creditor who, before the due date of fulfillment of obligation has, reasonably, concluded that the debtor, for any reason, would not perform their obligation, has the option to suspend his obligation according to the objective aspects criterion and after considering all surrounding circumstances of the case. In this paper, through a comparative approach in the Vienna Convention, its jurisprudential and Usuli feasibility in Islamic law will be studied and while presenting the suggested bases, by resorting to the rule of existence premise (moghaddameh vojoudieh) and the rules and issues originated from it such as rational, subordinate and annihilatory premises (moghaddameh mofavveteh), the main discussed issue (execution of the right to suspend in anticipatory breach) and the disputed actual breach may be proven so that the status of this remedy is established and strengthened in the Iranian Civil Code.

Knowing of formation of a legal rule is an efficient way to recognizing and assessing of that rule. Anticipatory breach doctrine became apparent in Common Law when the court in Hochster versus De La Tour case (1980), hold that a party could breach an executor contract prior to the performance date and injured party entitle to sue at once. Before it, courts had made a negative answer to this matter and expressly had denied it. Courts argument was that it is impossible to make a sentence before having a subject. But, refusing to accept repudiation, with certainty of future beach, would mean the waste of economic opportunities and remaining parties idle and delayed.

Breach of contract is of two kinds: fundamental and non fundamental. Fundamental breach not only damages the core of contract but it also deprives the other party of what he is entitled to. Breach of contract can be considered as fundamental when its result is foreseeable for the defaulting party or for a reasonable person in the same circumstance. Such defaults are of great importance in International Commercial Contract law and are mentioned in Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods,1980, Art. 25. Written statements of the above mentioned Art. is so general that makes it difficult to conform with cases. Therefore various interpretations about the concept of Fundamental Breach of Contract go on and on.

The time when breach of contract is realized, has developed various rules in different legal systems. In some countries, the contract is recognized as being breached when in addition to the expiration of the obligation term, creditor has claimed the performance thereof. In other countries, it is necessary and also sufficient that the obligation term gets expired. However in other legal systems, prediction of breach in future makes applicable the sanctions related to a real breach of contract. In this article with explanation of the meaning of anticipatory breach and economic analysis thereof in micro and macro levels, the validity of this institution in international and domestic systems are analyzed.

The aim of this study is that the cucumbers breach of condition in accordance with Article 234 of the Civil Code: "The condition of three types: 1-bet trait, 2-bet a result, positively or negatively verb 3-bet.Condition as the condition of recurrent quality or quantity of the transaction. The result is that the realization of an outside bet, bet Shvd.v current condition of the act is to be provided on one of the dealers or foreign person. So under this Article, the parties to the contract provisions of the contract state that, if the obligations in the contract have been violated, and their commitment to the condition that the contract stated, violated, cucumbers violation of the conditions for the person if he is in favor of a cause that means cucumbers violation of the right to termination condition is caused by the stipulation and consent will.we can say that famous jurists in violation of the act condition that in case of violation and refusal conditional on the fulfillment of the condition, stipulation has the right to force him to do if he wants and if Tzr force of the constitutional against, the stipulation is entitled to terminate the contract. the original Pydakhvahd.

According to the famous view of the Islamic jurists, contract of hire is a possessive one. One the most evident of this view could be seen in the legal consequences of the breach of contract by the private employee. Breach of this contract by the employee may be committed in various ways such as when he works for himself or others, gratuitously or otherwise; and the liability of the employee varies according to these ways as well as to various forms of private employee.This article tries to study the subject according to these forms and on the bases of possessive or promissory nature of the contract of hire. The study shows that as a general rule, in all forms of the private employee, breach of contract by him entitles the employer (hirer) to rescind the contract and recover the wages or retain the contract and recover the quantum meruit of the lost benefit.