The rights, obligations and undertakings of persons are transferred to their inheritors. The inheritors are entitled to the deceased rights and responsible to fulfill the obligations of the testator except the personal obligations and those that are not transferable. The obligations of the testator during his lifetime arise form either statute or contract.According to article 231 of non- contentious code, the executory debt of deceased has to be paid immediately. Islamic law confirms this rule. The question is that if someone enter into a contract and then he passes away before fulfilling his obligation, does his obligations turn to be present? In this article, we suggest that an obligation arisen from contracts, specially the bilateral agreements, which time is an important matter in assessing the consideration, the inheritors shall fulfill the obligation within the period specified by the contract.

Field and Aims: Contracts are the most important factor in the legal communication of people in society, and from this point of view, people can organize many of their affairs under the law. But in some cases, there may be differences between the parties in the implementation or violation of contractual obligations. At this time, the judge must determine whether the contractual obligations have been fulfilled or violated. But the judge must have criteria for this in order to enforce or violate the contract. Method: The present research was carried out with a descriptive analytical method. Finding and Conclusion: Regarding the criteria, it should be said that the judge should consider some cases when hearing the statements of the litigants and accept or reject them accordingly. These cases include that, (a) the person gets shocked due to the turmoil of emotions when making involuntary statements. (b) The person tries to make something look bad. (c) Regarding the statements of a child, the court should measure the children's intelligence and moral development using the methods that the judge deems appropriate and persuasive for him, and then listen to his statements and give them the necessary value as evidence. Finally, it can be concluded that there are provisions in English law for the subject of contractual obligations, but in some cases the decision about it has been left to the discretion of the judge, which is something like judicial legislation.

Extensive risks and dangers at sea lead to great losses to many maritime activists, including merchants, vessel owners and governments. The financial ability of any of the activists in this field to compensate the damages is very limited or may even lead to irreparable damages such as environmental pollution that cannot be compensated by money alone and has negative side effects. Therefore, nowadays, the issue of obtaining marine insurance is very important and has legal and international requirements, regardless of the rational benefit and commercial needs. by investigation international conventions, it was determined that due to the importance of the issue and in order to reduce the risk marine activists, various types of marine vessels insurance, including protection and compensation insurance, hull and machinery, cargo, etc. were predicted and the principle of compulsory insurance at sea is mainly designed to ensure the payment of debts and compensation by vessel owners. Therefore, obtaining marine insurance coverage is not only a commercial need for maritime activists, but this issue has become a legally binding rule in the international relation. However, obtaining vessel insurance is not included in domestic law and the basis for action is only some of the multilateral international treaties to which the Iranian government has acceded.

The rule of law is effective in the production of wealth and social welfare, so that any rule of law that causes a waste of resources must be reviewed. One of the functions of legal economic analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of legal rules and determine the most efficient ones. In other words, the economic analysis of law is the application of theories of economics, especially "efficiency" as the basis of legal rules in order to evaluate these rules and, if necessary, correct them. In line with this, law and economics use economic rules, especially microeconomics, and determine the guarantee of optimal implementation in terms of the theory of "price of breach of obligation". Economic analysis of law also seeks to achieve the most valuable legal rule, the value that is referred to in the economic literature as the theory of "social cost". In the present research process, which uses a descriptive-analytical method, it is concluded that the right of lien has not only failed to achieve its goals legally, but also economically, has caused a waste of resources, increased transaction costs and increased lawsuits. It goes so far as to sometimes lead to the termination of the contract or its goals.

When the free movement of the people and the goods or industrial products are to be effected and the states are determined to support and to implement such situation and to positively affect cross-border impact, they have to create and maintain an area of freedom, security and justice. One of the preliminary and basic issue is adoption of judicial measures relating to civil matters, a subject of which is non-contractual obligations, the concept which varies from one state to another, but certainly deals with risks inherent in a modern high-technology society.In this connection and in cases where a foreign element exist in non-contractual obligationsit is necessary in order to improve the predictability of the outcome of litigation, certainty, and free movement of judgments, the law applicable and/or the choice of law rules are enacted as the same national law as other choice of laws rules of the country.In Conflict of Laws, the European Parliament and the Council of Europe Adopted the "Rome II" Regulation (Reg. (EC) No.864/2007), which is the European Union Regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations. It became applicable in the Member States excepting Denmark from 11 January 2009 (Art.32). From this date, the Rome II Regulation creates a harmonised set of rules within the European Union to govern choice of law in civil and commercial matters (subject to certain exclusions) concerning non-contractual obligations. The requirement of legal certainty and the need to do justice in individual cases are essential elements of an area of justice. This Regulation provides for the connecting factors which are the most appropriate to achieve these objectives.The general rule for tort/delict is stated in this Regulation as the lex loci damni/ delicti commissi in Article 4 (1). There are two exceptions (or one exception (Art.4 (2)) and one' escape clause' (Art.4 (2)) to this general rule. The specific categories of tort/delict, are stated in Arts.5 (product liability), 6 (competition), 7 (environmental damage), 8 (IP infringements), 9 (industrial action). Provision has been made for special rules where damage is caused by an act other than a tort/delict, such as unjust enrichment (Art.10), negotiorum gestio (Art.11), and culpa in contrahendo (Art.12).Additionally, to respect the principle of party autonomy and to enhance legal certainty, in certain circumstances and subject to certain conditions, the parties are given the freedom of choice of the law applicable to a non-contractual obligation (Art.13).In order to safeguard the public interest of the forum the courts of the Member States are given the possibility, in exceptional circumstances, to apply exceptions based on overriding mandatory provisions (Art.16) and public policy (Art.26).This was considered and analyzed in this paper in order that its different aspects and features are clarified. This can help the law students to increase their legal knowledge and uderstanding of the subject, and it can also guide the lawyers and law-makers and ease their work to crystalise their own necessitis in the sense of what is the law applicable to non-contractual disputes (cases) in the courts of European Countries (almost 27 countries), and what are the critical points which should be regarded if a law is to be enacted.

Background and Aim: In addition to the medical dimensions and the numerous social and economic effects that followed, the corona virus (Covid-19) pandemic also brought many issues from a legal point of view, including the non-fulfillment of contractual obligations, which is still a matter of discussion and opinion. The purpose of this article is to compare the legal nature of the non-fulfillment of contractual obligations due to the Corona pandemic in Iranian legal system and international documents. Methods: This article has been written descriptively-analyticaly using library resources. Ethical Considerations: This research has been done be observing ethical principles and trustworthiness in using the available sources. Results: The findings indicate that in Iranian law, under the conditions of non-execution of the contract, it is possible to resort to the rule of force majeure and hardship and Corona can be considered as an example of force majeure. In international documents such as Unidroit and the Convention on the International Sale of Goods, the possibility of non-fulfillment of contractual obligations due to the pandemic-corona is possible among the examples of the force majeure and can be explained in the form of theories such as hardship and the difficulty of contract implementation. Conclusion: There is a great similarity between Iranian law and international documents regarding the non-fulfillment of contractual obligations due to the pandemic, although in international documents, force majeure and especially the difficulty of contract implementation have been more clearly addressed. Please cite this article as: Marandi B, Rafiei MT. A Comparative Study of the Legal Nature of Non-Fulfillment of Contractual Obligations Due to the Corona Virus Pandemic in Iranian Legal System and International Documents. Medical Law Journal. 2023; 17(58): e27.

In EU and American law, the principle of autonomy has been recognized. For the purpose of unification, Rome 1 Regulation allows parties to choose the law that has no link to the contract. By contrast, in American law, the selected law is required to have a basic or reasonable relationship with the contract. According to Rome 1 Regulation, the chosen law does not affect the application of overriding mandatory provisions of the law of the forum and the law of the performance of the contract. In American law, the chosen law should not be in conflict with public policy of the forum and a fundamental policy of a state which has, substantially, greater interest than the chosen state in relation to the determination of a particular issue. This article examines the positions of European Union and American law regarding the determination of applicable law.

One of the issues of the law of obligations in France is "modality" that it has been translated in the dictionary in condition and it's better to interpret the complications of the obligation that regardless of the source of obligation usually applies to all contractual and non-contractual obligations. One of these modalities is the indivisibility of the subject of obligations. Occasionally there are many parties for the obligation and the obligor and the obligee are numerous that obligation is divised. This is a principle in the law of obligations. But sometimes the subject of the obligation is indivisible. The obligation is indivisible when the obligor and the obligee are numerous and it has been created with one source and the subject of this obligation is indivisible that such obligation is subject to a certain legal regime that has been accepted by French and some other Muslim countries however, despite the theoretical and practical needs in Iran's civil law, it is not mentioned which is studied in this paper comparatively with French law.

The discussion about the person's liability for the actions attributable to him before the stage of contracting is a new debate that has been attracted the attention of legal circles. According to this debate, the person’ s freedom of contracting does not implement the person’ s freedom to ignore the rights and interest of other party. As a result, it would be possible that contracting person considered as responsible with the realization of contractual condition. However, the main problem is that despite the domination of the rule of contractual freedom in negotiating process, on what foundations such a responsibility can based. Does accepting the responsibility in this regard mean the violation of person’ s freedom of contracting? Hence, resorting to a descriptive-analytic method of research and a comparative approach, this research seeks to study the foundations of pre-contractual liability and also description of contractual, non-contractual or specific nature of the pre-contractual liability. Concisely, we can say that the most important reason for defending the pre-contractual liability would be the violation of fair negotiation obligation. Also pre-contractual liability has its own especial nature, but ultimately has a lot of correspondence with non-contractual civil liability.

According to the principle of privity of contract and that the contract does not establish any right or obligation with respect to third parties except in exceptional cases, this question arises that if breach of contractual obligation result in damages to the third parties what action or actions they can to do to prevent the losses or to claim compensation of damages? This study after analysis of different aspects about this issue, has achieved to this consequence that in cases that the sole solution for the prevention of damages to the third parties is binding the promisor to specific performance of contract, using such solution by the third party does not face any barrier. Moreover, in the case of occurrence of damages to the third party, he/she can exploit some rules such as deception and causation to claim the damages from the promisor.