Investigation of Trustee Rule and its Applications in Banking Contracts

The Stimman rule is one of the jurisprudential rules of dealing with transactions. The concept of Stimman's rule speaks of non-guarantees. This rule has specific implications for transactions and provides for rules that violate the contract's legitimacy. The main question is what is the application and application of this rule in banking contracts? The research method in this paper is a descriptive-analytic one based on Imamieh jurisprudence sources and seeks to investigate the hypothesis that there are instances of trust rule in banking contracts. The results of the study indicate that, in accordance with the Stimman's rule, in bank-secured contracts, customers are not liable for loss of facilities in the assumption of non-compliance and over-provision unless they are bound by the conditional acceptance. In fact, after converting iodine to iodine, the recipient of the facility is responsible for any defects or defects, even if caused by coercive events. A case study of some of the banking contracts such as civil partnership, Mudarabah and Marabah, which are of the contractual nature of the contract, shows that although the effect and function of the trusteeship rule are accepted in the contract, but by using the conditional capacity of the underwriter, the recipient of the facility becomes the iodine trustee. Has been. Accordingly, customers of the banking system who, according to Stimman's rule, were trustworthy and trustworthy, are obliged to compensate for possible losses even on the assumption of non-compliance. The same thing, that is to say, the guarantee of a person who is trustworthy, contradicts some jurispruden’:ts with the materiality and function of some contracts such as the Mudarabah contract.