اظهارنامه و مقایسه آن با مطالبۀ تعهد در حقوق فرانسه

قانون آیین دادرسی مدنی در مادۀ 156 و در بخش امور اتفاقی و تامینی به‌طور مختصر به ارسال اظهارنامه پرداخته است، اما در‌مورد ماهیت و آثار آن سخنی نگفته است. گو اینکه بر ارسال اظهارنامه اثر مهمی مترتب ندانسته و ارسال آن را یک امر تقریباً تفننی دانسته است، حال آنکه در دادرسی هر اقدامی باید دارای آثاری باشد. در قانون آیین دادرسی مدنی سابق، ارسال اظهارنامه در موادّ 709 و 710 در باب دهم تحت عنوان «خسارت و اجبار به انجام تعهد» مطرح شده بود. آوردن اظهارنامه در باب خسارت و اجبار به انجام تعهد، به این دلیل بوده است که، در بسیاری از موارد، ارسال اظهارنامه مقدمه‌ای برای مطالبۀ خسارت یا درخواست الزام متعهد به ایفای تعهد محسوب می‌شود. زیرا در بعضی موارد اگر اظهارنامه ارسال نشود مطالبۀ خسارت یا طرح دعوی به خواستۀ محکومیت متعهد به ایفای تعهد قابل استماع نیست. ازاین‌رو در این مقاله این موضوعات را مورد مطالعه و بررسی قرار داده‌ایم. به‌نظر می‌رسد عنوان باب دهم قانون آیین دادرسی مدنی سابق برگرفته از نام باب پنجم قانون مدنی فرانسه پیش از اصلاحات اخیر بوده است، که تحت عنوان خسارت و منافع ناشی از عدم اجرای تعهد[1] مطرح شده است. مادۀ 1139 الی 1142 قانون مدنی سابق فرانسه مطالبۀ طلب و تعهد را شرط مطالبۀ خسارت دانسته بود (موادّ 1345، 1-1345، 2-1345 و 3-1345 جدید). بنابراین، مطالعه در‌بارۀ ماهیت و آثار اظهارنامه نیازمند مطالعۀ حقوق فرانسه در این زمینه است. به همین دلیل، این مقاله اظهارنامه در حقوق ایران و مطالبۀ تعهد در حقوق فرانسه را با یکدیگر مقایسه کرده و مفهوم و آثار آن‌ها را مورد بررسی قرار می‌دهد.

the formal notice (ezharnameh) in iranian law and its comparison with the formal demand for performance (*mise en demeure*) in french law

the iranian code of civil procedure of 1379 (2000 ce) stipulates six precautionary measures: the formal notice (ezharnameh), preservation of evidence (ta'min-e-dalil), security from foreign nationals (ta'min-e-atba'-e-biganeh), security against frivolous claims (ta'min-e-da'va-ye-vahi), attachment of a defendant's property to secure a claim (ta'min-e-khasteh), and interim injunction (dastour-e-movaqqat). it can be posited that the first two precautionary measures, namely the formal notice (ezharnameh) and the preservation of evidence, are primarily intended to prepare the groundwork for success in litigation. the security from foreign nationals aims to protect the rights of an iranian defendant regarding the recovery of litigation costs. conversely, the attachment of property and interim injunctions are designed to facilitate the eventual enforcement of a judgment, although these precautionary measures may also serve other purposes. one such precautionary method for claiming a right is the dispatch of a formal notice (ezharnameh). according to the law, any person may, prior to filing a lawsuit, demand their right from another by means of a formal notice, provided that the time for demanding such right has fallen due. generally, any person has the right to formally notify another party of statements concerning their transactions and obligations by dispatching a formal notice. the formal notice is served by the state organization for deeds and properties registration or by court registries. although the dispatch of a formal notice is not universally mandatory, in certain instances, the initiation of legal proceedings is contingent upon its prior issuance; failure to do so may lead the court to issue an order of inadmissibility of the action (qarar-e adam-e estema'-e da'va).article 156 of the code of civil procedure, within the section pertaining to incidental and provisional matters, addresses the dispatch of a formal notice very briefly, without elaborating on its substantive nature or legal effects. this might imply that the legislator did not attribute significant legal consequences to its dispatch, viewing it as a somewhat perfunctory act. however, in procedural law, every action should ideally entail specific legal effects. the former code of civil procedure, in its articles 709 and 710 under chapter ten, titled damages and compelling performance of an obligation, had included provisions for the formal notice. the placement of the formal notice within the chapter on damages and specific performance was due to the fact that, in many instances, its dispatch serves as a preliminary step to claiming damages or requesting a court order to compel an obligor to perform their obligation. indeed, in certain cases, if a formal notice is not dispatched, a claim for damages or an action to compel the obligor's performance may not be admissible. consequently, this article undertakes a study and analysis of these issues. it appears that the title of chapter ten of the former code of civil procedure was adapted from the title of chapter five of the french civil code (prior to its recent reforms), namely damages and interests arising from the non-performance of an obligation (*dommages et intérêts résultant de l'inexécution de l'obligation*). articles 1139 to 1142 of the former french civil code stipulated that a demand for the debt or obligation was a precondition for claiming damages (cf. new articles 1345, 1345-1, 1345-2, and 1345-3 of the french civil code). therefore, an examination of the nature and effects of the formal notice necessitates a study of french law in this regard. for this reason, this article compares the formal notice in iranian law with the formal demand for performance (*mise en demeure*) in french law, and their respective concepts and effects will be explored.