This study explains the individual’s behavior toward profits and losses contained in differently framed combined incentive Contracts. Individual’s risk preferences and loss preferences are measured using Holt and Laury (2002) measure of risk aversion and Brink and Rankin (2013) measure of loss aversion, respectively. The last measure was adjusted with compensation characteristics in Iran. The relationship between these preferences and individual’s behavior under economically equivalent Contracts of different frames is examined using experiment. Participating 92 subjects as well as conducting four separate experiments, the result indicated that there is a negative relationship between loss aversion and accepatance of Contracts which have penalty component. Also, subjects preferred the first clawback contract (bonus> penalty) rather than the second clawback contract (bonus< penalty). In other words, Contracts framing as well as endowment effect play a vital role in individual choices. Failure of common economic theories in explaining of individual behavior is confirmed in this study.

Energy Service Contract is an important method for energy saving. While taking some degree of risk, Energy Service Companies implement the energy-saving projects in the form of energy performance Contracts for energy consumers (clients). This kind of Contracts enjoy some new, subtle and different features. The question is whether this type of contract can be classified as a new contractual form? If not under which type of existing contract forms are they classified? In this paper, the framework of shared savings and guaranteed savings Contracts as the main types of energy performance Contracts is reviewed. Documents issued by the Ministry of Petroleum are compared to some certain Contracts, including sales, promise of reward, hire-purchase and partnership; it is concluded that this specific kind of contract, is not compatible with any of the definite contract types mentioned above. Hence these Contracts should be recognized under the principle of sovereignty and freeness of wills, Article 10 of the Civil Code. it is argued that these Contracts are not marred by the risk of loss, so they are not defying the specific terms of law. it is argued that the structure of shared saving Contracts is the same as of the reward contract under the definite Contracts.

Ensuring a healthy environment involves and protects human beings and besides enjoying this right man has a commitment to protect it. The need to pay attention to the environment should be considered in parallel with the productive activities as a pillar of sustainable development. With regard to the position that the oil industry has found in today's world it should not be overlooked for human and environmental damage and we should look for solutions to reduce these injuries. Oil operations such as exploration development exploitation transportation and oil refining on the environment have devastating effects that can be controlled and reduced by measures. In this regard governments try to reduce the environmental impact of oil operations by setting laws and regulations. In this paper the emphasis on compliance with environmental requirements and the preservation of human rights of the environment has been addressed by the review of environmental laws and regulations and oil issues.

The authority of a captain is not limited to the technical management of the ship during the voyage and the administrative duties concerning the interaction with the administrative organizations located in commercial ports. The captain has, moreover, a special place arising from his role in the maritime trade scene and his role in managing the ship that allows him to act on behalf of the maritime carriers in the transaction or to take other necessary measures in crew recruitment, ship repair, fulfillment of basic needs, etc. in emergencies where the completion of the voyage is subject to prompt action by the captain. The captain's authority is sometimes deemed to stem from the legitimate and conventional appearance and, consequently, from the reasonable perception created for others. However, he does not have such authority in reality. So, the question arises as to whether the shipowner's defense that captain has acted beyond his authority, if proven, is admissible and precludes the legitimate expectations of the other party to the contract about the owner’s commitment to the consequences of the captain’s acts. In other words, can the captain's authority be extended and can he be considered the shipowner’s agent? In response to this question, legal doctrine and jurisprudence have suggested the apparent agency of the captain in support of third parties in good faith who deal with the captain by trusting in the appearance and considering his authoritativeness. In this study, this type of agency of the captain in his interventions is examined in the domestic and foreign legal system. The results indicate that the apparent agency of the captain is represented mainly in his transactions such as ship sales and mortgages, cargo sales and mortgages, ship rental, crew recruitment, and bill of lading. The apparent agency leads to the liability of the ship owner making him responsible for fulfilling obligations arising from the acts of the apparent agent. Although the advancement of knowledge and the development of communication tools in recent years have made it possible to communicate with the owner and ask him for instructions, the notion of the impossibility of extraordinary intervention of the captain as an apparent agent is hardly acceptable. Accordingly, the legal doctrine today emphasizes the apparent agency of the captain, focusing on his specific role and scope of authority as one of the major bases of the apparent agency. In line with the legal literature, the rulings of foreign courts on a variety of issues uphold the captain's authority to steer ships from the port of loading to the port of discharge. The captain's intervention on behalf of the shipowner is sometimes expanded to the point where court documents are sent to him rather than to the owner or even where he is considered a defendant himself, and sparing him from this status is ruled to be void. Although the legal systems has come to hold the view that the captain lacks the authority to sell the ship, his authority in mortgaging the ship and cargo is a point of contention, each legal system having its own position, with minor disagreements within each system. Following Article 28 of the Iranian Amendment to the Maritime Act approved on 9/18/2012, which has replaced Article 89 of the Iranian Maritime Act, obtaining permission from the shipowner, the sender and the cargo owner is a necessary condition for mortgaging the ship. Although the legislature may appear to want to reduce the captain's authority and, consequently, to strip him of his apparent agency, according to the Paragraph A of the above-mentioned article, the captain is still eligible to receive a loan if necessary funds are not provided by the owner or in necessities when urgent interventions are necessary. Moreover, according to Article 33 of the Amendment to the Maritime Act, which has replaced Article 94 of the Maritime Act, the deficiency of the latter, which failed to determine the legal status of the unjustified sale of the cargo, has been eliminated, and by confirming its validity, the apparent agency of the captain in the sale of cargo has been explicitly acknowledged. This agency can also be sustained in concluding a lease in the event of an emergency. Besides, due to the special place of the ship certificate of registry in establishing the ownership in some legal systems such as the French Law, if the tenant's name is not mentioned in the bill of lading, the owner, being named in the ship certification of registry, is considered responsible for the captain's obligations. The apparent agency of the captain in issuing the bill of lading now enjoys an almost consensual endorsement among legal systems of the world.

Nowadays disruptions in the type of interactions and the level of independence have led to a transformation in the law of Contracts.The most significant of these manifestations is represented in the increasing number of limitations placed on the freedom of Contracts.In fact, in the modern society, owing to significant differences in the individual's bargaining power and disruption in the balance of contract, on the one hand, and specialization of affairs, on the other, absolute deference to this principle would probably defeat its own purpose; not only will it not increase public welfare, but also it will worsen the hardships and difficulties facing consumers.In modern law, limitations are imposed on the freedom of contract not only to prevent the making of Contracts harmful to society, but sometimes it also requires individuals to conclude a contract or to accept the terms of the contract or to choose the other party to the point of impinging on the freedom of individuals.Therefore, compulsory Contracts are the result of limitations on the concept of the freedom of contract and its territory is a function of the economic and social necessities of each country.

Lien is the right of recoupment by one party until liability fulfillment by other party. This right becomes binding in exchange Contracts such as: sale and rent (lease). The main criteria for separationg them from non- exchange Contracts is commitment and confrontation between parties, such that if one of these two is removed, the contrant will not been of exchange type. In addition to describing A major reason for conducting this research is investigation of the lien enforcement domain and lacking of its application for sale as well as highlighting its effects and consequences in mutual interest Contracts from the viewpoint of jurisprudents. The research method is librarian and by using of appropriate.In this writing we described lien. Results showed that enforcement domain of the lien is not limited to sale contract; rather it involves other Contracts such as rentand mutual interest settlement. Some of its consequences are its deposition on the lienclaimer and lacking of need to bring a suit and the court sentence for enforcing it.

However, in the Iranian legal system, a legal entity called "administrative contract" has not been identified and despite the efforts of public law jurists, such a path has not gone well. But it seems that in Iran, in the shadow of the requirements of the modern state, some of the administrative Contracts here, specifically the mandatory ones, have been in place for decades, and promise to establish a law known in the Roman-German tradition as an "administrative contract. " The present article answers this question by understanding such importance: What are the grounds and problems of the birth of administrative Contracts through compulsory Contracts in the Iranian system? In response to this question, using the research method descriptive-analytical, these results have been obtained. First,Compulsory Contracts in Iran are, in many cases, functionally the same as administrative Contracts. Second,Due to the occurrence of such a situation, one can hope for the legal recognition and establishment of administrative Contracts in Iran and in this way it got rid of the confusion that prevails in the current atmosphere. Third,Despite the legislature's railing for the birth of administrative Contracts in Iran, there are many obstacles in front of this legal institution in Iran. Fourth, The focus of these obstacles is in the view of the Guardian Council on the issue of the contract.