تعارض قوانین حاکم بر تعهدات پولی

به دنبال جهانی‌شدن بازرگانی، مسائل حقوقی جدیدی مطرح می‌گردد که پیش از این در قوانین و نیز در دیگر منابع حقوق برای آن‌ها راه‌حل صریحی پیش‌بینی نشده‌‌است. یکی از این قبیل موضوعات، مسالۀ تعیین قانون حاکم بر تعهدات پولی است. در این اثر در تلاشیم تا به بررسی مسالۀ تعیین موضوعات تحت حکومتِ قوانین حاکم بر تعهدات پولی بپردازیم. لذا، سوال اصلی این مقاله، آن است قوانین اصلی و فرعی حاکم بر تعهدات پولی، حاکم بر چه موضوعاتی هستند؟ این مقاله با استفاده از روش تحلیلی-توصیفی و کتابخانه‌ای و بهره‌گیری از ادبیات حقوقی غربی کوشیده اثبات کند قوانین اصلی حاکم بر تعهد پولی، بر تعیین واحد پول محاسباتی موضوع تعهد، تعیین واحد پول پرداختی، تعیین نحوۀ پرداخت قانونی تعهد پولی، تعیین بهرۀ قراردادی، تعیین نرخ تسعیر جهت تبدیل پول محاسباتی به پول پرداختی، بازارزیابی تعهدات پولی، مبانی سقوط تعهدات پولی، تعیین واحد پولی و وجه رایج هر کشور، تعیین پول موضوع تعهد در فرض تغییر در حکومت‌ها حاکم است و قوانین فرعی حاکم بر تعهدات پولی، بر شیوۀ پرداخت، تعیین روزهای تعطیل بانکی، تعیین مبانی تعلیق تعهدات پولی، تعیین قالب پولی قسمت اجرایی رای دادگاه و تعیین نرخ بهره در فرض عدم وجود بهرۀ قراردادی حکومت می‌کند.

conflict of laws applicable to monetary obligations

introduction globalization of international trade and communication has resulted in more and more legal issues, for which laws and other sources of law do not provide explicit answers. money and monetary payments are one of theseissues. money has two seemingly opposing characteristics in cross-border relationships between people:international and national. due to its place in cross-border economic relations, the medium of exchange has an international character. there is no universal money that acts as a medium of exchange in international relations, but each money has its own nationality (e.g. dirhams and rials). although many studies have been conducted on the conflict of laws governing non-monetary obligations, iranian legal works have not addressed various issues and challenges associated with the conflict of lawsgoverning monetary obligations. accordingly, this study examines the rules of conflict of laws applicable tomonetary obligations.even though money is the basis of all financial relationships, defining money in conventional legal terms is difficult. in spite of the fact that money is present in every financial relationship, there is no definition of money in the law. the monetary and banking law of iran states only that the iranian currency is the rial. understanding money requires understanding that it is not a material possession, but purchasing power. unlike legal events and legal acts, money cannot be classified according to conventional jurisprudence. lastly, monetary instruments (payment instruments) should not be confused with money.money has a dual nature that combines immateriality with materiality. as a measure of value in a givensociety, money has an immaterial aspect. this is the immaterial aspect of money, which symbolizes a country's sovereignty and serves as its economic foundation. public law and public international law are more concerned with the immaterial side of money.material money is money that has been placed in a special society so that it can be exchanged. money'smaterial aspect is called purchasing power and it is the subject of ownership. the material aspect of money is what is the subject of monetary obligations. in the same way that music is compared to musical instruments, money is compared to monetary obligations. money can only serve as a medium of exchange if it is exchanged.a monetary obligation should be attached to money.