عنوان مقاله [English]
The transaction option with the development of financial markets, especially the stock market and securities in Iran, entered the legal, jurisprudential and legal issues of Iran. Therefore, due to the alteration between this type of contract and the usual contracts in the legal and jurisprudential system, their nature and validity were questioned and many opponents and supporters among jurists and legislators were found. Since the arrival of this type of contract in Iran, its principle has been challenged, the most important factor of which has been different are the legal, jurisprudential and legal attitudes towards it. Therefore, in this study, with a different approach from previous studies examining this type of contract from only one perspective or at least two perspectives, an attempt has been made with a comparative approach to examine the nature of these contracts from three legal, jurisprudential and legal perspectives. An independent approach to these three approaches scrutinizes these types of agreements. Studies show that conflicts, contradictions and disputes over the nature of this type of contract are the result of ignoring the independent nature of this type of contract and none of these three approaches have given an independent principle to these contracts and to form this type of agreement in other contracts under other terms and conditions, and this is one of the most important causes of contradictions, conflicts and disputes in this area. However, these types of contracts have an independent and unique nature.
Examining the nature of the transaction option from three perspectives: law, jurisprudential and legal with a comparative approach
Investigating the causes of conflicts, contradictions and disputes over the nature of such contracts in law, jurisprudence and legal issues.
What is the legal and jurisprudential meaning and nature of the transaction option?
What are the types of option contracts and what are their applications?