Volume 10, Issue 3 (2006)
CLR 2006, 10(3): 159-186 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
- -, - -. Comparative Study of Actionable Misrepresentation in English, Iranian and Islamic Law. CLR 2006; 10 (3) :159-186
URL: http://clr.modares.ac.ir/article-20-2995-en.html
URL: http://clr.modares.ac.ir/article-20-2995-en.html
Abstract: (6131 Views)
According to English legal system, misrepresentation is actionable when before the conclusion of the contract and with the intent to induce the other party, the misrepresentator makes a false statement as to material facts of the contract. In Iranian legal system which is derived from Islamic law, misrepresentation is actionable provided that the misrepresentator deceives the other party and the latter –because of deception – enters into the contract. Generally, in Islamic law, all kinds of acts and omission and nondisclosure which lead to the deception of other party may be actionable misrepresentations. However, there are some exceptions in these two legal systems: statement of opinion and puffery are not actionable misrepresentations.
The bases of actionable misrepresentation in English law are common law, equity and Act of 1967, while, in Iranian law, the bases of actionable misrepresentation are rule of Tahzir, Ghorur and civil code.
Keywords: Fraudulent misrepresentation, Negligent misrepresentation, Innocent misrepresentation, Actionable, Tahzir(Warning), La zarar(Non detriment), Ghorur(Deceit)
Received: 2005/01/19 | Accepted: 2006/05/17 | Published: 2006/09/23
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |