A Critical Analysis of Judicial Practice in the Legal Characterization of Juridical Acts by Judges in Iran

Abstract

Legal characterization plays a decisive yet often underestimated role in private law adjudication, as it constitutes the judicial operation through which factual situations are transformed into legally meaningful categories. This article examines the concept and practice of legal characterization in Iranian private law with a particular focus on Supreme Court jurisprudence. It argues that legal characterization is a normative–judicial operation that must be distinguished from interpretation, completion of contracts, and application of law, and that persistent failure to maintain these distinctions has produced structural inconsistencies in judicial reasoning. Drawing on doctrinal analysis and a qualitative review of Supreme Court decisions issued between approximately 2011 and 2025, the study identifies recurring patterns of mischaracterization across key areas, including mixed contracts (especially pre-sale construction agreements), banking and financial instruments, digital and fintech transactions, and emerging unilateral juridical acts such as electronic wills and smart contracts. The findings reveal that courts frequently rely on party labels, conflate characterization with interpretation, or apply legal norms without prior determination of legal nature, resulting in unpredictable judgments and fragmented jurisprudence. The article further demonstrates that these inconsistencies are not incidental but stem from the absence of a coherent theoretical framework governing legal characterization in Iranian doctrine and judicial practice. By situating characterization as a question of law and a judicial duty grounded in objective structural criteria, the study highlights the need for methodological discipline and explicit reasoning at the level of classification. The article concludes that recognizing legal characterization as a foundational judicial function is essential for restoring legal certainty, enhancing appellate coherence, and enabling Iranian private law to respond effectively to complex modern transactions while preserving doctrinal integrity.