The rule of obligation is one of the key rules of Imamiyyah jurisprudence, according to which a person accepts a commitment on the basis of religious or customary rules, the other party has the right to oblige him to enforce it. This study examines the position of this rule in the Iranian legal system, based on a descriptive-analytical method, citing library sources including jurisprudential texts, subject matter laws and judicial opinions. The findings of the study show that the rule of obligation, although rooted in jurisprudential texts, has been reflected in the Iranian legal system, especially in civil law and the Code of Civil Procedure.In the jurisprudential section of the research, the documentation of the requirement is analyzed, including verses and traditions. In addition, the implementation of this rule with legal concepts is shown that while in Imamiyyah jurisprudence, the scope of the rule of law encompasses all religious and customary obligations, Iranian law is mainly limited to contractual obligations. Also, the examination of the Iranian judicial procedure confirms that the courts use this rule to oblige commitment to fulfill the obligations.This study ultimately concludes that despite Iran's law's influence on the jurisprudential requirement, ambiguity in the legal definition and neglect of the exaggerated dimensions of the rule in the judicial procedure is one of the existing challenges. It is suggested that in the future reviews of civil law, a more comprehensive definition of this rule be presented, and that judges pay more attention to its jurisprudential principles in their decisions. This research could be the basis for subsequent studies on the impact of jurisprudential rules on the Iranian legal system.