Abstract
The enjoyment of the possession right for those who exercise legal activities is a feature whose absence leads to applying the term unauthorized interloping to a legal action. The study of written works of the Islamic jurisprudents shows that the discussion of validity or invalidity of unauthorized interloping legal acts has begun from unauthorized sale and made some of them to believe in invalidity of sale and the other unauthorized contracts. Whereas, most of the jurisprudents, in addition to accepting the capability of authorization of unauthorized sale, have extended the decree of validity to other unauthorized contracts this idea has also been preferred by the Iranian legislator. But unauthorized unilateral acts have been considered as nullified in the idea of those jurisprudents who have accepted the theory of validity of unauthorized contracts. These jurisprudents have documented the invalidity of unauthorized unilateral acts by intellectual and narrative evidences and particularly by consensus. In opposite, a few jurisprudents, by breaking the aforementioned evidences, have regarded unauthorized unilateral acts qualified of the decree of correctness as such unauthorized contracts. Amid these discrepancies, this paper proves the hypothesis of the validity of unauthorized unilateral act by independent evidences and also by accepting unity of criterion and evidence between contract and unilateral act. The evidences used for proving this hypothesis are: citing various documentary evidences, majority for person who makes unilateral act, lack of conditionality of conjunction of consent and will are the most important points which have been studied.
Keywords
)