خلاصة:
مدت در رهن، در دو قالب، مطرح شده است؛ یکی، بهتبع مؤجل بودن دَین و دیگری، توقیت عقد رهن برای مطلق دَین. اگرچه فقیهان، اولی را صحیح دانستهاند، این به معنای دقیق کلمه، توقیت عقد رهن نبوده و طبعاً از محل بحث، خارج است؛ بهخلاف شکل دوم، که بر بطلان آن، ادعای اجماع شده است. البته در فقه و حقوق مدنی، علاوهبر اجماع، استدلالهای دیگری هم بر بطلان، ارائه شده است؛ از جمله اقتضای عقد رهن، نتیجۀ دوام و تبعی بودن آن، اقتضای معنای لغوی رهن و مواردی از این دست. با عنایت به سکوت قانون مدنی در این مورد، نوشتار حاضر، به روش توصیفی- تحلیلی، پس از بررسی سابقۀ بحث در آثار فقها، هریک از ادلۀ مطرحشده را به نقد نشسته و پس از طرح ملاحظاتی، در نهایت به این نتیجه دست مییابد که اقتضای اِعمال ارادۀ آزاد اطراف عقد، اصل صحت، توجه به هدف رهن (ایجاد اطمینان در مرتهن و ایجاد انگیزۀ ادای دین در راهن) و عنایت به فواید عقلایی و موردی توقیت و منطق حقوقی، صحت تراضی بر توقیت بوده و با اوصاف ذاتی آن نیز در تنافی نیست. ضمن آنکه، اجماع ادعایی نیز خالی از مناقشه نیست و در مقابلِ شواهد دال بر صحت توقیت، تاب نمیآورد. در پایان نیز، براساس نتایج بحث، پیشنهاد گنجاندن مادهای در قانون مدنی، با مضمون صحت توقیت رهن، ارائه میشود.
The term in the mortgage is presented in two formats; one is due to the
deferred debt and the other is making the mortgage contract temporal for the
absolute debt. Although the jurists have considered the first one to be
correct, this was not, in the strict sense of the word, making mortgage
contract temporal, and it is naturally out of the question, unlike the second
form, which is invalidated by consensus. Of course, in jurisprudence and
civil rights, in addition to consensus, other arguments have been presented to
invalidate this. Among them are the requirement of a mortgage contract, the
result of its durability and subordination, the requirement of the literal
meaning of the mortgage, and similar cases. In this search, we are looking
for an answer to this question: Is making the mortgage contract temporal,
correct and possible? For example, can money be mortgaged for two years?
Is there a legal basis for the time limit in the debt document? The civil law is
silent on this matter, but some jurists have clearly considered the nonlimitation
of the term as one of the conditions for the validity of the
mortgage. The result of the discussion is that if the condition of making
temporal is considered invalid due to the opposition to the requirements of
the mortgage contract, then the claimant's guarantee will be lost and it will
become a normal demand. Therefore, considering the silence of the civil law
and the conflicting nature of some issues in jurisprudence and the lack of a
research background on this issue, the necessity of the present research
becomes clear, in which, by focusing on the reliable sources of Imami law
with the help of the library, the analysis of making mortgage temporal will
be maid, in the form of an additional condition. Considering the silence of
the civil law in this matter, the present article, in a descriptive and analytical
method, after examining the history of discussions in the works of jurists,
criticizes each of the arguments presented and after making some
considerations, finally, taking into account the requirements of the
applications, the free will surrounding the contract, the principle of
correctness, attention to the purpose of the mortgage (creating confidence in
the mortgagor and motivating the payment of debt in the mortgagor) and
attention to the rational and case benefits of making contract temporal and
legal logic, reaches the conclusion that the agreement on making temporal is
correct and it does not conflict with its inherent qualities. At the same time,
the alleged consensus on the invalidity of the temporary mortgage is not
without controversy, and does not hold up against the evidence of the
correctness of making temporal. In general, it seems that the presumption of
invalidity or at least doubt in the correctness of making mortgage temporal,
in the Islamic and civil law, has led the regulators of these contracts to make
the whole contract temporal, in such a way that the interests of the some
bank contracts are secured, from the supposed problem of the timing. In fact,
with this action, while the bank enjoys the rational benefits of mortgage
timing, they also distance themselves from this possible problem. Finally, it
should be said that the timing of the mortgage and its inclusion in the official
documents, in Iran's legal system, not only does not face any obstacle, but
considering its rational benefits, it is also compatible with the legal logic and
customs of the society. On the other hand, the need to amend the laws and
regulations of the legal system in order to make it more efficient requires
that every research should include a section for presenting suggestions to the
legislator. Based on this, it is suggested that, like the amendments made in
some articles of the civil law, in the years after its approval, in order to clear
any doubts, the correctness of the timing of the mortgage should also be
included in the text of the civil law, with the following content: "Article 794
bis (recommended): The mortgage contract can be long-term and the
condition of the mortgage being long-term is not void. In this case, if the
considered time comes before the payment of the debt, it is like that from
then on, until the payment of the debt, the mortgage guarantee is not
considered and the debt is free of mortgage. In this case, the agreement on
making temporal, depending on the case, will be interpreted in line with the
conditional will to guarantee religion and its belongings and related matters
as much as possible. In any case, the conditional defendant can request the
mortgage after fulfilling all his obligations.