In the Romano-Germanic legal system, the process of contractual liability is transparent and clear: the concept of loss is a broad concept and fault plays a major role in creating civil liability.Failure to do so will result in direct coercion, indirect compensation, itsmajorlook.com the possibility of judicial termination, and compensation for all damages for late payment.In Imamiyah jurisprudence, too, the non-fulfillment of the provisions of the contract has clear concepts, rules and process: the concept of loss is a narrow concept and relating to property, fault has no role in creating civil liability, in case of non-fulfillment (if its meaning is conceivable) there is a possibility of direct coercion by the ruler, and damages due to late payment are not counted as damages.But the sanction system of non-fulfilment in Iran intends to combine these two coherent systems.Concepts such as loss, role of fault, and the process of non-fulfillment are ambiguous because the Iranian legal system both has accepted the guarantee for violating the conditions of the contract in Islamic jurisprudence and Articles 221 and 222 of the Civil Code as to the violation of the obligation.
Combining these two systems together is essentially impossible and the Iranian system must move towards one of them only.The method of this research is material content analysis and historical analysis of the legislation hyfrodol process.In content analysis, an attempt is made to examine the central sign along with the surrounding concepts of the problem of discovering and comparing signs in two different texts.