عنوان مقاله [English]
The principle of necessity and strength of contracts and the effort to prevent their unnecessary dissolution are considered today as one of the basic principles in the formulation of rules and regulations. It can be said that this issue is one of the biggest concerns of international documents. There is no consensus among jurists and jurists on the effect of the abolition of the option on the basis of the contract on Iranian law. Also, the issue of whether the options can still be retained by canceling the basis of the options and giving the option to the owner of the option to terminate the transaction despite the use of the basis of his option or not? One of the controversial issues in Iranian law and Imami jurisprudence. Despite the importance of the issue, there is no general rule in this regard in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian law, and the authors of the civil law, due to the differences of jurists and the multiplicity of opinions, have not set a general rule in this regard and only in Articles 421 and 478 of the law. Civil has imposed two seemingly conflicting rulings. Regarding the first effect of termination, which is the release of the parties from the contractual obligations, there are no explicit provisions in the Iranian Civil Code, however, it can be inferred from some articles, especially the related materials, that such an effect is also intended for termination of the contract, such as Articles 219, 284, 286, 387. Of course, this acquittal of the parties from their contractual obligations is not related to the obligations. The results of the research indicate that the harmless rule, explicit and implicit conditions and special reasons are the basis of options in Iranian law and also the omission of the basis of options can cause the fall of options, in which case we can refer to Articles 396 to 457.