The Jurisprudential and Legal Status of Sale Below Fair Market Value in Islamic Jurisprudence and the Laws of Iran and England

Abstract

This article examines, through a descriptive-analytical method, the validity of sale below fair market value in Islamic jurisprudence and compares it with the legal systems of Iran and England. Dumping refers to the sale of goods in a foreign market at a price lower than the final production cost of those goods in the exporting country, with the aim of gaining a competitive advantage over other suppliers of the same product. In fact, dumping involves selling a commodity in another country below its normal and fair value. Dumping is regarded as an unfair commercial practice intended to expel competitors from the market and inflict serious harm upon the domestic industries of importing countries, thereby producing adverse effects on the trade systems of importing states. In response to dumping, various measures have been adopted within domestic legal systems and particularly within the framework of the World Trade Organization. The Anti-Dumping Agreement of the World Trade Organization constitutes the most significant international legal instrument for combating dumping, addressing both its identification and methods of counteraction. In Iranian law, the history of anti-dumping regulations dates back to the Customs Law of 1971, which was later repealed following the enactment of the new Customs Law of 1971. The most important domestic regulation for combating dumping is the Anti-Dumping Regulation adopted by the Council of Ministers in 1971. Another relevant statute is the Law on the Implementation of the General Policies of Article 44 of the Constitution, which prohibits anti-competitive practices and establishes mechanisms for addressing them. Since dumping is considered one of the manifestations of anti-competitive conduct, it may be argued that the authority designated in this law to adjudicate anti-competitive practices is also competent to hear dumping claims and disputes. This situation reveals an ambiguity within the domestic legal system regarding jurisdiction over dumping disputes, as two separate domestic laws recognize two distinct competent authorities. On the other hand, the validity of sale below fair market value in Islamic jurisprudence may, in some cases, be regarded as fictitious or collusive. Najsh refers to the preference of one ruling or proposition over another on the basis of logical criteria and juristic reasoning. Concerning the validity of sale below fair market value in Islamic jurisprudence, various forms of najsh have been discussed, each relying on particular legal arguments and religious considerations in reaching a determination.