Ethical Grounds and Jurisprudential Principles Governing the Validity or Invalidity of Heavy Dowries

Abstract

The purpose of the present study is the ethical contexts and jurisprudential principles governing the validity or invalidity of heavy dowries. The type of applied-developmental research and its method is descriptive-analytical. To conduct this research, in the first stage, through library studies and in the second stage, through interviews and field observations, the information required for the research is collected. Studies have shown that, given that there is no limit to the seal in the law, a person can engage in the obligation to the extent that he can afford it within a reasonable period of time. Considering the explicitness of Article 348 of the Civil Code, which considers the impossibility of surrender as the reason for the invalidity of the contract, the same ruling can be issued in the case of dowry with the unity of the criteria derived from this article. With these details, it is not possible to judge the validity of the heavy dowries that are imposed on the couple upon request, because it is not possible for the couple to submit this dowry to the existing description. Some jurists do not take such dowries seriously due to the inability of the couple and believe that there is no real will in this regard, which means that the agreement on the dowry is invalid. On the other hand, in civil law, in cases of invalidity of the seal, the ruling stipulates the need to pay the seal, provided that the entry has taken place. In this regard, too, if the husband has the power to pay the dowry, he must surrender it, otherwise, according to the theory of dissolution, he owes the same dowry that the husband is able to surrender and will not have the right to demand from the other wife.