Examining Legal Termination (Ipso Facto Dissolution) in the Iraqi Legal System in Comparison with the CISG

Abstract

This study investigates the concept of ipso facto (automatic) termination of contracts within the Iraqi legal system in comparison with the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). Contract termination, as one of the primary mechanisms for ending contractual obligations, holds particular significance in contract law and may occur under various statutory or contractual conditions. The objective of this research is to conduct a comparative analysis of the principles and foundations of contract termination across three different legal systems and to evaluate their legal compatibility and alignment. The methodology of this study is primarily analytical and comparative, involving a detailed review of legal texts, judicial precedents, and scholarly articles concerning the dissolution of contracts under Iraqi law as well as the provisions of the CISG. Findings reveal that both the Iraqi legal system and the CISG serve as legal frameworks governing commercial relations; however, there are notable similarities and differences between them in terms of legal processes and requirements. The Iraqi legal system is largely influenced by codified civil law derived from the Majalla (Ottoman Code) and Islamic legal traditions, whereas the CISG is an international convention specifically designed to facilitate cross-border trade and addresses commercial issues irrespective of national legal systems. Ultimately, a comparative assessment of contract termination in the Iraqi legal system and the CISG highlights the need for a flexible and adaptive legal framework in international commercial transactions. Each of these systems reflects distinct legal perspectives on termination, shaped by the unique cultural and social contexts in which they operate.