In the insurance contract, assuming the fulfillment of the contractual conditions, the insurer is obliged to fulfill his obligation, to compensate the loss. Sometimes, despite the fulfillment of the conditions for claiming contractual rights for the policyholder (realization of contractual risk), based on the fulfillment of a matter that is typically a breach of obligation by the policyholder, the insurer is released from its obligation, which is interpreted as "Forfeiture ". The basis of this fall of the right can be according to the law or contractual condition. In foreign legal systems, the validity of the clause in the insurance contract is limited to specific cases and subject to compliance with conditions. In French law, the condition of "Forfeiture" is subject to limitations, both in terms of nature and form. In terms of form, the clause must be binding, in the sense that the insured must know precisely which of his obligations the forfeiture of the right is. It should also be written in clear and bold terms. From a substantive point of view, according to the law of December 31, 1989, it is effective only when the insurer proves that the loss occurred as a result of the policyholder's non-obligation. In the law of England, due to the seriousness of the guarantee of the implementation of the breach of warranty in the law of 1906, fundamental reforms were made in the insurance law of 2015 and in articles 10 and 11 of the insurance law, it is stipulated that the breach of the warranty does not exempt the insurer from the obligation to compensate the damage, but with the breach of the warranty, the insurer's obligation to will be suspended. In addition, the insurer cannot refuse to compensate the damage by using the breach of warranty even if it is not related to the damage. In Iranian law, in Article 15 of the Insurance Law, this ruling is provided for the obligation to inform about the occurrence of an accident and to try to deal with the damage, but regarding whether the parties to the insurance contract can agree on this in other cases as well, or it should be considered limited to legally authorized cases, there is no text. In addition, the law is silent about the legal nature of this condition. The importance of examining the "condition of Forfeiture" is that such a condition is widely used by insurers in insurance contracts. While the provisions of this condition, the collapse of the most important effect of the insurance contract (one of its two cases), It means "Insurer's obligation to compensate". In addition, the explanation of the legal nature of this performance guarantee can help to explain the various aspects of this institution and the conditions of its impact on the legal relationship of the parties and adjust the superior position of the insurer in concluding the contract according to the supplementary nature of the insurance contract. The current research is an applied research and the method of collecting information is a library. The author's research method is descriptive, analytical and critical. The fundamental question is what is the legal nature of the " Forfeiture" in insurance contracts, furthermore, what are its validity conditions? It seems that the nature of this clause is "Falling Obligation" and can be analyzed in the form of causes of falling of obligations and it cannot be considered as a "Exclusion Clause" and the validity of this clause must be confirmed in the insurance contract based on the principle of contractual freedom. This research work is considered fundamental and at the same time practical, which tries to be discussed with an analytical approach and with descriptive, qualitative aspects and using library data to the extent necessary to conduct the research. In order to achieve this, first, according to the background, the required sources were prepared from Persian, English and French legal books and articles, and then according to their content and the analysis of the contents, the desired results, including the explanation of the legal nature of Clause Forfeiture in The insurance contract and its credit terms and conditions were obtained.

The forfeiture of rights serves as a general remedy for the policyholder's obligations before, during, or after the insured event. However, since this remedy is contingent upon a breach of obligations by the policyholder, it typically becomes effective only after the occurrence of the event that is the subject of the insurance contract. The insured’s right to claim compensation or receive insurance benefits is forfeited based on an act typically constituting a breach of obligation by the insured. The French legislator has not explicitly stipulated cases of forfeiture of rights within insurance law; however, it has recognized the insurer's right to include a forfeiture clause. In the common law system, forfeiture clauses are mainly discussed in the form of "warranty clauses."In Iranian law, Article 15 of the Insurance Law provides provisions regarding the obligation to notify the occurrence of an incident and to take measures to mitigate damages. This research aims to describe, analyze, and elucidate the theoretical foundations and conditions affecting the waiver of rights in insurance contracts. In this research, library-based, descriptive, and analytical methods were employed, resulting in the conclusion that the jurisprudential basis for the condition of the forfeiture of rights is the "rule of acting to harm," while its legal basis is private punishment. The effect of this enforcement mechanism on the parties to the insurance contract must be examined in light of the distinction between intentional breach of obligation or proof of breach of obligation and the causal relationship between the breach of obligation and the resulting damage.

Nowadays, due to increasing importance of international trade and transportation of crude oil, sellers and purchasers of crude oil are constantly looking for the best and most efficient insurance coverages for their oil cargoes, which they sell and purchase. This has become significantly important especially in recent decades, due to considerable increase in oil price which has subsequently increased extensively the risks of transportation of crude oil.This article studies the general clauses of Lloyd’s marine policy, as one of the most important examples of model contract and clauses on oil cargo insurance. It then focuses on exploring the guaranteed outturn clause and the difficulties which may arise if the sale and purchase contracts keep silent on the quality determination issue. This paper can assist the owners and carries of crude oil to have a better understanding of their risks and to use the best and most efficient options available to cover and control the risks of their commercial voyage.

The subject of liability insurance contract is the insured's liability debt. The insurer's obligation to indemnity is realized when within the contract term, damage is incurred by the insured. But according to claims-made clause (reclamation clause) the insurer's obligation is realized just when the first claim is made in the policy period, though damage itself, or the act causing it has been made before this period. This clause has been encountered with doubts and criticisms by French jurisprudence which is possibly due to misunderstanding about its real nature. Accordingly, this article has focused - after a preliminary representation of The Clause- on explanation of the Clause's legal nature in France and Iran.

" Other insurance" clause frequently has been one of the controversy issues in insurance policies which relates to double insurance matters, but this clause clarifies to what amount insures should compensate losses and damages and refer to others. The property or liability under more than one coverage for the same risk which ate valid at the same time and same beneficiary shall not lead to which the assured benefit more than he has suffered. So, to share the amount of compensation between insurers is the matter here which determined by "other insurance" clause which each insurer to what amount should compensate and substantially is he liable for compensation or not? Interactions between other insurance clauses according to types of this clause such as pro-rata, excess and escape sometimes make conflicts with no compatibility. In this case it worth analyzing the exact words of clauses and the intention of parties. Furthermore, interaction between other insurance clause and indemnity make some confusion to determine priority. In some cases, courts held indemnity precedes to other insurance regardless to its wording and in some others, courts held the loss and damage should be compensated due to other insurance clauses.

“ Indemnification” is a common method for the risk allocation in contracts in the Common Law; according to which, one party is liable to indemnify the other party against the losses resulted from his anticipatory act, from the indemnitee’ s liabilities or from a third party’ s claim. This institution has emerged from the customs formed amongst the merchants, gradually recognized by the legal systems. In this paper, we are going to examine the validity of the indemnity clause by using the relevant legal principles and rules. Studies show that the indemnity clauses are typically being considered valid, except in cases of indemnitee’ s deliberative act or his gross negligence. In this paper, the concept of indemnity clause and its validity and variety along with the similar legal institutions in the Iranian law and the Shiite jurisprudence are being studied.

This study aims at investigating semantic impacts of the verb of the main clause on the interpretation of the event expressed in the subordinate clause. In order to achieve the objective of the study, first, about 1000 compound sentences were collected from three novels by Mahmood (1365/1986 & 1380/2001) and Golshiri (1385/2006); second, only 400 sentences which fitted the purpose of the study were selected for analysis. According to the findings of the study not all main clauses can take any sort of clause types as subordinate clauses. In addition, the verb mood of the subordinate clause may be determined by the semantic features of the verb of the main clause.According to the data and its analysis, main clause verbs can be put into three categories based on their semantic features: a) those indicating certain actualization of the event expressed in the dependent clause, b) those which do not guarantee the actualization of the event expressed in the dependent clause though its actualization is possible, and c) those which do not permit the actualization of the event expressed in the dependent clause.

The conflict between freedom parties of contract to choose the terms and contents of the contract with the necessity of compensation of illicit damage, on the one hand, and contrasting economic and social benefits and problems of exemption clause, in the other hand, lead to legal system is doubtful for permit it, and despite the tendency to accept the validity it as a principle, several exceptions to this principle are imported to prevent unfair agreements. An economic analysis of exemption clause and survey to the its economic disadvantages and benefits and its role in the efficiency help to facilitate to find contractual justice.Method of research is analytical and descriptive method and, during the necessity, we have comparative method to it will be clear to other legal systems approach.Economic analysis to exemption clause shows that the acceptance the principle of validity of exemption clause leads to economic efficiency, but when the contract is incomplete, as because it is monopoly and data inequality, intervention of court is necessity to modify or void exemption clause. The result is usually, but not always, consistent the legal analysis of exemption clause.

Can the liberty of property be considered as a general and independent clause in the Sale contract? How do Shi’ite and Sunni scholars and Iranian legal system deal with this problem? Some Imamite scholars consider liberty of property as a general and independent clause, but others, taking it as a general clause, interpret it an independent clause provided that there is no preventive law but they do not consider it a genuine one .The third group of scholars have rejected its conditionality, generality and genuineness and consider that only the existence of some specific preventive rights prevents from the validity and effectiveness of the sale. The current Iranian statutory law follows the latter jurisprudential view. Those Sunni scholars working on this topic question the genuineness of the subject, and their interpretation is based only on the condition that the property is fully owned, or having a full control over its delivery, or finally in the condition that the preventive rights are missing. The author believes that specific evidence explaining the preventive rights (such as in Waqf or rent/mortgage) doesn’t represent the general clause; on the other hand, selling a non-free property has reasonable effects and interests, and a reasonable man would not avoid such dealings; therefore, there’s no proof to refute it. As a result, there would be no room to accept the necessity of liberty of sale as a general and independent clause.