@article { author = {Mousavi, Seyyed Abbas}, title = {The responsibility of the seller to compensate the buyer in case of belonging the sale object to a third party}, journal = {Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law}, volume = {2}, number = {4}, pages = {414-432}, year = {2019}, publisher = {Iranian Law and Legal Research Institute}, issn = {2981-1805}, eissn = {3041-8755}, doi = {10.22034/law.2019.239615}, abstract = {According to sections 362, 390 and 391 of the Iranian Civil Code, There is no doubt as to the seller`s liability, after receiving the price, to indemnify the buyer in the case of a third party`s right to whole or part of the goods. But, the code has no provisions as to the amount the buyer is entitled to as damages. This may have resulted from the lack of consensus among Muslim legal scholars whose views have been a main source of the Iranian Civil Code. In its uniform treatment decision No. 733 dated 7/10/2014 the Plenary Assembly of Iran`s supreme court trying to end the controversy has held that in such cases the buyer is entitled to the current price of the goods. But, in fact, the supreme court has failed to reach its goal in ending the controversy through its decision due to the lack of conformity with the goals of the court issuing the upheld judgement and having no relation with the plaintiff`s claim (the current price of the goods) and therefore can be criticized as being unjust and inequitable. In this article, after discussing the different views and the consequences of the decision by the Assembly, we have reached the conclusion that the just and logical solution would be the proportionate indemnification.}, keywords = {Seller,Buyer. Damages,Tortious Liability,Nullity,Buyer`s liability}, title_fa = {مسئولیت بایع در پرداخت خسارت ناشی از مستحق‌للغیر درآمدن مبیع}, abstract_fa = {در مسئولیت بایع از باب ضمان درک مبیع و تعلق جزء یا کل آن به غیر پس از تصرف در ثمن، برابر مواد 362، 390 و 391 قانون مدنی تردیدی وجود ندارد. اما اینکه خریدار در اثر بی‌نتیجه شدن عقد و تحمل خسارت، به چه مقدار استحقاق مطالبه غرامت دارد؟ مقررات موضوعه پاسخی دقیق اعلام نکرده است. شاید این امر ناشی از آرای مختلف فقها به عنوان منبع اصلی قانون مدنی باشد. رای وحدت رویه شماره 733 مورخ 15/7/1393 با اعلام اینکه در فرض مزبور، مشتری مستحق دریافت ارزش روز ثمن مبیع می‌باشد به زعم خود به مناقشات موجود در رویة قضایی خاتمه بخشیده است، اما این رای در عمل موجب حل اختلاف نشده و راهگشا نیست. در این بررسی با مرور عقاید مختلف و تبعات رای وحدت رویه به این نتیجه رسیدیم که راه حل منطقی و عادلانه اعلام میزان غرامت بر مبنای «جبران نسبی» با لحاظ طبع و خصوصیات هر دعوا است.}, keywords_fa = {بایع,مشتری,خسارت,مسئولیت‌‌‌مدنی,معامله باطل,ضمان بایع}, url = {https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_239615.html}, eprint = {https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_239615_2f89c0217a797b423e343fb5099e22e1.pdf} }