Today, there is less dissidence in the limitation of implementation of the principle of contractual freedom. Especially, the principle cannot be considered as a basis of legitimacy and validity of the contract in B2C contracts or where a person in a weaker position than the other, or in standard contracts or contracts that are not negotiated by the parties. The imposition of any unjust and unfair condition that is contrary to good morals, public order and the obligatory rules is invalid. This prohibition cannot be violated by concluding a contract or including a condition in the contract. The sanction of the implementation of such a violation is the invalidity of the legal action. The uniform judicial precedent no 794 expresses the same view. The surplus profit condition is contrary to the general economic order and contrary to the obligatory rule and violates the prohibition of the legislator. Inspired by this this uniform judicial precedent, the courts should in any other case easily rule on the invalidity of a legal act which has violated a prohibition, and in principle prohibitions in the banking and monetary matters
Ghanavati, J. (2022). uniform judicial precedent no 794 :nullity of surplus profit condition. Journal of Legal Studies, 14(2), 279-305. doi: 10.22099/jls.2022.39331.4211
MLA
Jalil Ghanavati. "uniform judicial precedent no 794 :nullity of surplus profit condition", Journal of Legal Studies, 14, 2, 2022, 279-305. doi: 10.22099/jls.2022.39331.4211
HARVARD
Ghanavati, J. (2022). 'uniform judicial precedent no 794 :nullity of surplus profit condition', Journal of Legal Studies, 14(2), pp. 279-305. doi: 10.22099/jls.2022.39331.4211
VANCOUVER
Ghanavati, J. uniform judicial precedent no 794 :nullity of surplus profit condition. Journal of Legal Studies, 2022; 14(2): 279-305. doi: 10.22099/jls.2022.39331.4211