فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی

فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی

رویکرد رابطه‌ای به قرارداد، قرارداد رابطه‌ای قاعده‌مند (نوشته) و آثار آنها در روابط طرفین قرارداد

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 استادیار، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران
2 دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) mahoornasirii@gmail.com
10.48308/jlr.2026.241695.2964
چکیده
با آنکه بسیاری از پژوهشگران قرارداد، رویکرد رابطه‌ای را پذیرفته‌اند و آن را به‌منزلۀ چارچوبی نظری و ابزاری عملی برای جبران کاستی‌های حقوق قراردادها در تأمین منافع متقابل طرفین به کار می‌گیرند، ادعای سرنوشت مبهم چنین قراردادی در برخی موارد به فراگیر نشدن استفاده از آن منجر شده است. نیاز به دخالت دادگاه‌ها و تبعات آن، نشان‌دهنده این سرنوشت مبهم است. در مقابل، تحقیقات نظری و عملی نشان می‌دهند این عدم استفاده، صورت‌مسئله را حذف کرده و به نادیده انگاشتن تأثیر ابعاد اقتصادی و اجتماعی قراردادها، خواسته‌ها و درحقیقت هدف اشخاص از انعقاد قرارداد منجر شده است. این درحالی است که رابطه‌گرایی برای طرفین قرارداد واجد اثر عملی بوده و به‌خصوص در روابط بلندمدت نجات‌بخش است. مقالۀ حاضر درصدد است ضمن بررسی چیستی و ویژگی‌های رویکرد رابطه‌ای به قرارداد، با عبور از صرف تفسیر رابطه‌ای، به معرفی قرارداد نوین قاعده‌مند رابطه‌ای بپردازد. قراردادی که ضمن مبتنی بودن بر نفع متقابل، کتبی و مصرح، لکن منعطف است. بدین ترتیب این قرارداد همراه با بهره‌مندی از مزایای رویکرد رابطه‌ای، از ایرادات منتسب به آن فارغ است و امکان استفاده از رویکرد رابطه‌ای را به شکل نوشته و مبتنی‌بر اهداف حقوق قراردادها فراهم میآورد.

تازه های تحقیق

 

·         بررسی چیستی رویکرد رابطه‌ای به قراردادها و آثار آن، اهمیت این دیدگاه را در نظام‌های حقوقی مختلف آشکار می‌سازد.

·         حقوق کلاسیک قراردادها در دستیابی به مقصود طرفین از انعقاد قرارداد، تحقق آن و همچنین تأمین ابعاد اقتصادی‌-اجتماعی روابط بلندمدت، محدودیت داشته و ناکافی بوده است.

·         قرارداد رابطه‌ای قاعده‌مندِ مکتوب، راهکاری منعطف برای تضمین نفع متقابل، پیش‌بینی‌پذیری و تداوم و ثبات در انواع روابط قراردادی ارائه می‌دهد.

کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

The Relational Approach to Contract, the Vested (Formal) Relational Contract, and Their Implications for Contractual Relationships

نویسندگان English

Mohammadali Bahmaei 1
Mahoor Nasiri Mahini 2
1 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti Universityi, Tehran, Iran.
2 PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. Corresponding Author Email: mahoornasirii@gmail.com
چکیده English

Introduction
This article examines the relational approach to contracts, an approach that, despite theoretical acceptance and practical application in many countries and its recognized positive effects, has not yet found a place in Iranian legal literature. Classical contract law emphasizes the necessity of the parties’ explicit intent, precise expression of will, and fulfillment of written terms, stating that its aim is to ensure predictability and certainty. However, it often fails to achieve its stated objectives and is unable to reflect and realize the parties’ actual intent, which is inherently shaped by the economic, social, and human dimensions of the relationship. The relational theory of contracts emphasizes ongoing cooperation, mutual trust, and the parties’ actual objectives, particularly in long-term contractual relationships. Despite the theoretical acceptance of relational contracts, their practical application has been limited. A review of laws and judicial decisions from different countries indicates that legal uncertainties and the need for court intervention are the main reasons for this limited use. Therefore this article aims to examine the effectiveness of written relational contracts, thereby contributing to the improvement of contractual practice.
Methods
The research method employed in this article is descriptive-analytical, and the data collection approach is library-based. In the descriptive section, the fundamental concepts and legal foundations of relational approach to contracts are elucidated, while the analytical section throughout the article examines the practical impacts of the aforementioned approach. Then the analysis has led to vested (written) relational contract and the concept, foundation and impacts of it have been analytically studied.
Results and Discussions
The relational approach to contracts seeks discovering instead of emphasizing on what it shows. This approach proves that ignoring the relationality of the contracts, may lead to overlooking the economic and social dimensions of contracts and failing to achieve the parties’ true objectives, leading to inefficiency in contract formation, negative performance by one or both parties, and consequent losses. Therefore, a novel written contract, informed by the relational approach, has emerged. The question is whether a structured relational contract can integrate classical legal principles with the relational approach, providing an enforceable legal framework that maximizes mutual benefits, reduces opportunistic behavior, and preserves long-term relationships? By enabling the introduction of the relational approach-particularly its structured form-into the Iranian legal system, significant transformation in both contract formation and enforcement, including judicial practice, becomes plausible. This study employs legal analysis with comparative and interdisciplinary approaches. The theoretical foundations of relational contracts and their development in jurisdictions recognizing relational principles are examined. Iranian legal principles are analyzed to determine the scope and limitations of classical contracts. Selected foreign laws and judicial decisions are also reviewed to assess the judicial application of the relational approach and its practical implications. Findings from economics, organizational behavior, and strategic management are integrated to analyze the economic and behavioral effects of relational contracts, providing a comprehensive understanding of the advantages and challenges of this approach. The analysis indicates that classical contract law, with its formalistic and abstract approach, is often unable to reflect the parties’ actual intentions and the complexity of their relationships, and cannot resolve the issue of incomplete expression, where predicting all future contingent events at the time of contracting is impossible. Courts are consequently forced to interpret or apply rules, leading to unpredictable or undesired outcomes. In contrast, the relational approach emphasizes that all contracts are to some extent relational, and cooperation, trust, and mutual adjustment of the relationship are essential for long-term success. A structured and written relational contract, explicitly incorporating relational principles while maintaining flexibility, provides deeper access to articulating and realizing the parties’ intentions, better protecting mutual interests than classical contracts, implicit contracts, or unwritten ones, reducing opportunistic behavior, increasing enforceable predictability, and ensuring the continuity of long-term relationships even under unstable economic, social, or political conditions. As the first comprehensive legal study in Iran focusing on relational contracts, this article introduces the concept of the “vested (structured) relational contract” and bridges the gap between relational theory and practical application. The research demonstrates that relational contracts can enhance efficiency and fairness in contract execution and reflect the parties’ true objectives. The proposed model has significant implications for courts, offering a framework for interpreting and enforcing contracts based on relational principles, while equipping parties with tools to organize long-term relationships and effective cooperation, reduce disputes and costs, and increase trust and stability. It also emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary training for lawyers and judges to understand relational dynamics and apply this framework effectively.
Conclusion
The vested (structured) relational contract provides a practical and legal mechanism for certainty of the benefits of contractual relations, containing implicit contracts, away from a dispute. Hence providing the parties with the merits of relational contracts. This type of contract overcomes the limitations of classical law, increases predictability, reduces opportunistic behavior, and strengthens the continuity of long-term relationships. Combining a written expression of the parties’ intentions with relational principles, establishes the psychological contract between the parties and ensures that their true objectives are achieved and mutual benefits preserved. Given that this study represents the first comprehensive legal analysis of relational contracts in Iran, understanding this approach for the first time in the country could lay the groundwork for a major transformation in the fate of contracts, including international contracts. It also paves the way for future research, practical implementation, and adaptation of relational contract principles to the Iranian legal and economic context, providing a tool to strengthen, preserve, and optimize contractual relationships both in performance and dispute resolution

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Flexibility
Contract Law
Relational Approach
Written Contract
Mutual Benefit
منابع
کتاب
1.      انصاری، باقر،  نقش قاضی در تحول نظام حقوقی، تهران: میزان، 1392.
2.      امامی، حسن، حقوق مدنی، جلد 1، تهران: کتابفروشی امامیه، چاپ سیزدهم، 1373.
3.      کاتوزیان، امیرناصر، حقوق مدنی، قواعد عمومی قراردادها، جلد 1: مفهوم عقد-انحلال و اعتبار قرارداد، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار، چاپ دهم، 1384.
4.      کاتوزیان، امیرناصر، حقوق مدنی، اعمال حقوقی، قرارداد-ایقاع، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار، چاپ یازدهم،  1385.
5.      نجفی، محمدحسن، جواهر الکلام فی شرح شرائع الاسلام، جلد 22، قم: دفتر انتشارات اسلامی وابسته به جامعه مدرسین حوزه علمیه قم، 1395.
مقاله
6.      جوانمرد، لیلا و شادی شاهون‌وند، «اصل اعتماد و آثار آن در قرارداد»، فصلنامه بین‌المللی قانون‌یار، دوره 5، شماره 18، تابستان 1400، صص 98-73.
7.      حاجی‌پور، مرتضی، «نقش حسن نیت در قرارداد»، فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق خصوصی، دوره 41، شماره 4، 1390، صص100-83. Doi: 20.1001.1.25885618.1390.41.4.5.9
8.      حسین‌آبادی، امیر، «تعادل اقتصادی در قرارداد(2)»، فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی، دوره 1، شماره 21-22، 1377، صص 153-121.
9.      دارویی، عباسعلی، «ماهیت و اعتبار تعهد تمدید قرارداد»، مجله مطالعات فقه و حقوق اسلامی، دوره 12، شماره 22، 1399، صص 286-263. Doi: 10.22075/feqh.2019.14583.1570
10. کاتوزیان، امیرناصر، «تفسیر قرارداد»، مجله دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دوره 70، شماره 0، 1384، صص 310-277.
References
Books
1.      Ansari, Bagher, The Role of the Judge in the Evolution of the Legal System, Tehran: Mizan, 2013. (In Persian)
2.      Argyris, Chris. Understanding Organizational Behaviour, London: Tavistock, 1960.
3.      Birks, Peter. An Introduction to the Law of Restitution, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.
4.      Brownsword, R. “After Investors: Interpretation, Expectation and the Implicit Dimension of the ‘New Contextualism’”, In: Campbell, D., H. Collins, and J. Wightman (eds.). Implicit Dimensions of Contract: Discrete, Relational, and Network Contracts, (International Studies in the Theory of Private law), Bristol: Hart, 2003.
5.      Campbell, David. and H. Collins. “Discovering the Implicit Dimensions of Contracts”, In: Campbell, D., H. Collins, and J. Wightman (eds.). Implicit Dimensions of Contract: Discrete, Relational, and Network Contracts, (International Studies in the Theory of Private law), Bristol: Hart, 2003.
6.      Campbell, David. and J. Loughrey. “The Regulation of Self-interest in Financial Markets”, In:  O’Brien, J. and G. Gilligan (eds.). Integrity, Risk and Accountability in Capital Markets: Regulating Culture, Oxford: Hart, 2013.
7.      Campbell, David., Linda Mulcary and Sally Wheeler (eds.). Changing Concepts Of Contract, Essays In Honour of Lan Macneil (Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies), London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
8.      Emami, Hassan, Civil Law, Volume 1, Tehran: Imamieh Bookstore, 13th Edition, 1994. (In Persian)
9.      Katouzian, Amir Nasser, Civil Law, General Rules of Contracts, Volume 1: Concept of Contract – Termination and Validity of Contracts, Tehran: Sahami Enteshar Company, 10th Edition, 2005. (In Persian)
10.  Katouzian, Amir Nasser, Civil Law, Legal Acts, Contract – Unilateral Acts, Tehran: Sahami Enteshar Company, 11th Edition, 2006. (In Persian)
11.  Matsumoto T. “Anglo-American Law Research in the Study of Civil Law in Japan”, In: Z. Kitagawa and K. Riesenhuber (eds), The Identity of German and Japanese Civil Law in Comparative Perspectives, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2007.
12.  Najafi, Mohamad Hasan, Jewels of Speech in Explaining the Laws of Islam, Volume 22, Qom: Islamic Publishing Office, affiliated with the Seminary, 2016. (In Persian)
Articles
13.  Andrews, N. “Interpretation of Contracts and Commercial Common Sense: Do Not Overplay This Useful Criterion”, Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors, Volume 76, Issue 1, 2017, PP 36-62. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197316000805/
14.  Badawi, Adam B. “Relational Governance and Contract Damages: Evidence from Franchising”, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Volume 7, 2010, PP 743-792. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1443515/
15.  Baker J. H. “From Sanctity of Contract to Reasonable Expectations”, Current Legal Problems, Volume 32, Issue 1, 1979, PP 17–39. https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/32.1.17/
16.  Barnett, Randy E. “Conflicting Visions. A Critique of Ian Macneil’s Relational Theory of Contract”, Virginia Law Review, Volume 78, Issue 5, 1992, PP 1175-1206. https://doi.org/10.2307/1073395/
17.  Campbell, David. “Good Faith and the Ubiquity of the Relational Contract”, The Modern Law Review, Volume 77, Issue 3, 2014, PP 475-492. Doi:10.1111/1468-2230.12075/
18.  Campbell, David. “Ian Macneil and the Relational Theory of Contract”, CDAMS, Center for Legal Dynamics of Advanced Market Societies Kobe University, Discussion Paper, 2001, PP 1-83.
19.  Campbell, David. “The Limits of Concept Formation in Legal Science”, Social and Legal Studies, Volume 9, Issue 3, 2000, PP 439-447. Doi:10.1177/096466390000900308
20.  Cannon Joseph P., Ravi Achrol and Gregory T. Gundlach. “Contracts, Norms, and Plural Form Governance”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Volume 28, Issue 2, 2000, PP 180- 194. Doi:10.1177/0092070300282001
21.  Cimino, Chapin F. “The Relational Economics of Commercial Contract”, Texas A&M Law Review, Volume 3, Issue 1, 2015, PP 91-130. https://doi.org/10.37419/LR.V3.I1.4
22.  Darou’ei, Abbas-Ali. “Nature and Validity of Contract Renewal Obligations”, Journal of Studies in Islamic Law and Jurisprudence, Volume 12, Issue 22, 2020, PP 263-286. Doi: 10.22075/feqh.2019.14583.1570  (In Persian)
23.  Fondrieschi, A. F. “Discrete’ and ‘Relational’ Approaches in Implicit Contracts, A Look at English, Japanese and Italian Law”, De Gruyter, Ercl, Volume 15, Issue 4, 2019, PP 421-445. https://doi.org/10.1515/ercl-2019-0023/
24.  Frydlinger, David, Oliver Hart and Kate Vitasek. “A New Approach to Contracts, How to Build Better Long-Term Strategic Partnerships”, Harvard Business Review, 2019.
25.  Goo, Jahyun, Rajiv Kishore, Raghav Rao and Kichan Nam. “The Role of Service Level Agreements in Relational Management of Information Technology Outsourcing: An Empirical Study”, MIS Quarterly,Volume  33, Issue 1, 2009, PP 119–145. https://doi.org/10.2307/20650281/
26.  Gounari, Zoe. “Developing a Relational Law of Contracts: Striking a Balance Between Abstraction and Contextualism”, The Society of Legal Scholars, Legal Studies, Volume  41, Issue 2, 2021, PP 177–193. https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2020.23/
27.  Gulati, R. and Nickerson J. A. “Interorganizational Trust, Governance Choice, and Exchange Performance”, Organizational Science, Volume  19, Issue 5, 2008, PP 688-708. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0345/
28.  Hajipour, Morteza, “The Role of Good Faith in Contracts”, Quarterly Journal of Private Law Studies, Volume 41, Issue 4, 2011, PP 83-100. Doi: 20.1001.1.25885618.1390.41.4.5.9 (In Persian)
29.  Haley John O. “The Role of Courts in “Making” Law in Japan: The Communitarian Conservatism of Japanese Judges”, Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal, Volume 22, Issue 3, 2013, PP 491-503.
30.  Heide Jan B. and George John. “Do Norms Matter in Marketing Relationships?” Journal of Marketing, Volume 56, Issue 2, 1992, PP 32-44. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252040.
31.  Hermalin, Benjamin E., Avery W. Katz and Richard Craswell. “The Law and Economics of Contracts”, Columbia Law and Economics Working Paper, Issue 296, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0730(07)01001-8/
32.  Hossein-Abadi, Amir, “Economic Equilibrium in Contract (2)”, Legal Research Quarterly, Volume 1, Issues 21-22, 1998, PP 121-153. (In Persian)
33.  Javanmard, Leila and Shadi Shahoonvand, “Principle of Trust and Its Effects in Contracts”, International Quarterly Journal of Ghanoonyar, Volume 5, Issue 18, 2021, PP 73-98. (In Persian)
34.  Katouzian, Amir-Nasser, “Contract Interpretation”, Faculty of Law and Political Science Journal, Volume 70, Issue 0, 2005, PP 277-310. (In Persian)
35.  Kvaloy Ola. and Trond E. Olsen. “Balanced Scorecards: A Relational Contract Approach”, Journal of accounting Research, Volume 61, Issue 2, 2023, PP 619-652. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12465/
36.  Lioliou, Eleni, Angelika Zimmermann, Leslie Willcocks and Lan Gao. “Formal and Relational Governance in IT Outsourcing: Substitution, Complementarity and the Role of the Psychological Contract”, Information Systems Journal, Volume 24, Issue 6, 2014, PP 503-535. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12038/
37.  Macaulay, Stewart. “Non-Contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study”, American Sociological Review, Volume  28, Issue 1, 1963, PP 55-67. https://doi.org/10.2307/2090458/
38.  Macneil, Ian R. “Relational Contract: What We Do and Do Not Know”, Wisconsin Law Review, 1985, PP 483-525.
39.  Macneil, Ian R. “Values in Contract: Internal and External”, Northwestern University Law Review, 1982, PP 340-351.
40.  Mayer, Roger C., James H. Davis and F. David Schoorman. “An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust: Past, Present and Future”, The Academy of Management Review, Volume 20, Issue 3, 1995, PP 709-734. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.2307/258792/
41.  McClendon, Bill, Debra D. Burke and Lorrie Willey. “The Art of Negotiation: What the Twenty-First Century Business Student Should Know”, Journal of Legal Studies Education, Volume 27, Issue 2, 2010, PP 277-319. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1722.2010.01078.x/
42.  Meiklejohn, Alexander M. “Castles in the Air: Blanket Assent and the Revision of Article 2”, Washington and Lee Law Review, Volume  51, Issue 2, 1994, PP 599- 668.
43.  Milhaupt, Curtis J. “A Relational Theory of Japanese Corporate Governance: Contract, Culture and the Rule of Law”, Harvard International Law Journal, Volume  37, Issue 1, 1996, PP 3–64.
44.  Mohr Jakki and Robert Spekman. “Characteristics of Partnership Success: Partnership Attributes, Communication Behavior, and Conflict Resolution Techniques”, Strategic Management Journal, Volume 15, Issue 2, 1994, PP 135–152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250150205/
45.  Poppo, Laura and Todd Zenger. “Do Formal Contracts and Relational Governance Function as Substitutes or Complements”, Strategic Management Journal, Volume 23, Issue 8, 2002, PP 707–725. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.249/
46.  Robinson, Sandra L. and Denise M. Rousseau. “Violating the Psychological Contract: Not the Exception But the Norm”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Volume 15, Issue 3, 1994, PP 245–260. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1002/job.4030150306
47.  Rousseau, Denise M. “Schema, Promise and Mutuality: The Building Blocks of the Psychological Contract”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Volume 74, Issue 4, 2001, PP 511-541. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1348/096317901167505/
48.  Rubinson R. “Client Counseling, Mediation, and Alternative Narratives of Dispute Resolution”, Clinical Law Review, Volume 10, Issue 2, 2004, PP 833-876.
49.  Scott Robert E. “Conflict and Cooperation in Long-Term Contracts”, California Law Review, Volume  75, Issue 6, 1987. https://doi.org/10.2307/3480547/
50.  Skorbiansky, Sharon Raszap. “Investing in Communication: An Experimental Study of Communication in a Relational Contract Setting”, Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, Volume 74, 2018, PP 85-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2018.03.008/
51.  Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess. “A Psychological Account of Consent to Fine Print”, Lowa Law Review, Volume 99, Issues 14-22, 2014, PP 1745-1786.
52.  Williamson, Oliver E. “The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach”, American Journal of Sociology, Volume 87, Issue 3, 1981, PP 548-577.
Cases and Awards
53.  Baird Textile Holdings Ltd v Marks & Spencer Plc, Court of Appeal, England, [2001].
54.  Ford Tractor Kabushiki Kaisha v. Tokyo Sanyo Trading Co., Tokyo High Court, Hanrei Jiho Issue 958, P 99, 1980, Tokyo, Japan.
55.  Investors Compensation Scheme, v West Bromwich Building Society, Court of Common Pleas, London, England, [1998].
56.  Mannai Investments Co v Eagle Star Life Assurance Co, Court of Common Pleas, London, England, [1997].
 
 

  • تاریخ دریافت 06 مهر 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری 13 آبان 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش 29 دی 1404