In many hiring of persons contracts, the hireling delegates the performance of the obligation to a third party. For instance, a contractor who has undertaken a large-scale project may subcontract different sections to specialized subcontractors. Similarly, a surgeon might assemble a team to perform an operation under his/her supervision. The question that arises here is: In cases of delegated obligations, what responsibility does the first hireling bear if the third party causes damage? As a general rule, damage caused by a third party does not create liability for the hireling unless such liability has been explicitly or implicitly stipulated for the hireling. Unlike the laws of other countries, contractual liability arising from the act of a third party cannot be considered a principle in Iranian law. Similar approaches for the liability of the primary hireling in cases of damage caused by a third party can be considered through implied contract terms and governmental decrees.
One of the most difficult cases to describe a contract is one in which the parties conclude two or more contracts in the form of a single contract. The main issue in such cases is how this contract should be described. Terms and rules of which of the contracts constituting the contract should govern the contract? And is there a Correlation between the constituent contracts of a mixed contract in terms of validity and invalidity? In this article, these issues have been studied with a descriptive-analytical method. It seems that if the combined contracts are Commutative and each Consideration is specified independently and none of the contracts is a stipulation or term of another contract, each of them is subject to its own rules and their validity and invalidity do not affect each other. But if the Consideration of the contract is the same or the parties have made the contracts conditional on each other, each contract is a part of the whole and the annulment of each contract is considered as partial annulment of the contract And the rules of sales unfulfilled in part, That is, the deduction from the Consideration and the Revocation of the correct part is applicable. Cases where a single contract is concluded that does not fit into any of the nominate contracts but the effects of multiple contracts have been used to achieve a single purpose, we are not dealing with a mixed contract but with a simple innominate contract.
In most legal systems, the right to cancel the contract is provided for consumer in electronic contracts with slight variations. In article 6 of the European Union directives on the protection of consumers in respect of distance contracts, such right is provided too. Article 37 of Iranian EC code considered for the right of withdrawal is very close to the above terms. There is a controversy about the nature of this right between the authors. The dominant approach considers it as a new legal cancellation right. It seems that despite the apparent similarity, the right of withdrawal in these two, is fundamentally different. Article 37 unlike its European equivalent, obligates the supplier to provide the withdrawal right for the consumer in the contract not any establishment of the right of rescission for the consumer.
