@article{MAKHILLTSS201712824413,
    title = {Fraud under Private International Law of Iran},
    journal = {The Social Sciences},
    volume = {12},
    number = {8},
    pages = {1389-1393},
    year = {2017},
    issn = {1818-5800},
    doi = {sscience.2017.1389.1393},
    url = {https://makhillpublications.co/view-article.php?issn=1818-5800&doi=sscience.2017.1389.1393},
    author = {Abasat and},
    keywords = {the law of cause and effect,Fraud,court conflicts,conflict of laws,the connecting elements},
    abstract = {Fraud is generally defined in the law as an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made
by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act
and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage. Fraud may also be made by an omission
or purposeful failure to state material facts which nondisclosure makes other statements misleading. To
constitute fraud, a misrepresentation or omission must also relate to an ‘existing fact’, not a promise to do
something in the future, unless the person who made the promise did so without any present intent to perform
it or with a positive intent not to perform it. The false statement or omission must be material, meaning that it
was significant to the decision to be made. Also, an opinion does not constitute an existing fact and cannot
be the basis of a claim of fraud unless the person stating the opinion has exclusive or superior knowledge of
existing facts which are inconsistent with such opinion. The misrepresentation or omission must be made
knowingly and intentionally, not mistakenly or accidentally, so that the person either knew or should have
known of the falsity or acted in negligent disregard of its truth or falsity. The person charged with fraud must
have intended the Plaintiff to rely on the misrepresentation or omission and Plaintiff must have been injured
by such reliance to prevail on the claim. Sometimes, it must be shown that Plaintiff’s reliance was justifiable and
that upon reasonable inquiry would not have discovered the truth of the matter. For injury or damage to be the
result of fraud, it must be shown that except for the fraud, the injury or damage would not have occurred. Fraud
in the factum means fraud in the obtaining the execution of the agreement or delivery of a document. As
opposed to fraud in inducing someone to sign a document, it is fraud regarding the contents of the document,
so that the person defrauded is unaware of what they are signing. Fraud is ne of the crucial elements of Private
International Law. It makes issues related to the conflict of law more complicated. Two rather differing meaning
can be envisaged for fraud: the first definition constitutes non-observance of a domestic or foreign law, by
means of making voluntary changes in connecting elements such as nationality and domicile. In this study, it
becomes clear that evade of parties the law by changing the connecting elements is not always good. The
modern definition of fraud is considered as the escape of all parties or one of them from competent law along
with a change of legal relations of substance which is determined by examining the fraud by both material and
mental elements in the development of the legal establishment and proof of them. But proving the fraudulent
intent of all parties or one of them will not be always an easy task. In Iran, it appears that under the Article 990
of the Civil Code, aiming to avoid fraud, the return of Iranians who have acquired foreign nationality is subject
to the discretion of that government as well as Iran’s judiciary.}
    }