• The adoption of the idea of representation marked a departure from the usual rules for concluding transactions. The principle is that the person who comes forward to conclude a transaction is the one who expresses their will to do so, and they are the one who acquires the rights and bears the obligations resulting from it. Legal thought remained confined to this view for a long time; a person alone conducts their own transactions and alone is subject to their effects.
• However, remaining within this framework soon proved inadequate in meeting the demands of practical life. Maintaining this view became an obstacle to the circulation of wealth and assets, and it disrupted the legal lives of many members of society. The circulation of wealth requires flexibility in the rules governing its disposal and transfer. Furthermore, many individuals in society are unable to express their will, and some who can, find their will insufficient to achieve or protect their interests. Others have circumstances—such as illness, absence, or imprisonment—that prevent them from managing their own affairs, requiring someone to act on their behalf.
• Thus, legal thought found itself facing a dilemma whose solution required allowing one person to conclude a transaction while its effects apply to another. The solution was representation. The adoption of this idea underwent a long evolution, beginning with its acceptance in a narrow scope, then expanding to include other areas. Nevertheless, some legal systems, including French law, have not yet adopted the idea of representation as an independent system framed by general rules. In contrast, other systems, like the German and Swiss laws, have adopted the idea in rules of comprehensive application and have dedicated general provisions to it.
• It is necessary to acknowledge the precedent set by Islamic jurisprudence in this field. Based on verses from the Holy Quran, it adopted the idea from its early stages. The Quran contains numerous references to various forms of representation. Thus, the Holy Quran overcame the obstacle that many legislations faced, which was the difficulty of accepting the 'transfer' of an act of will to another will. Consequently, representation in all its forms became permissible in Islamic jurisprudence, with rules established to regulate its application.
• It is therefore clear that highlighting the contribution of Islamic jurisprudence to the idea of representation is a subject worthy of research, especially when compared and contrasted with the approaches of other legislations. This study is of particular importance in Jordanian civil law, as the Jordanian legislator did not opt for a comprehensive regulation of representation. Instead, parts of its rules were included in the Civil Code—and some special laws—leaving the rest to what is established in Islamic jurisprudence, to be inferred by both the regular and Sharia judiciary from its sources, most notably the Majallat al-Ahkam al-Adliyya and the Book of Sharia Provisions. It is perhaps fortunate that the Jordanian legislator has become aware of this gap, moving to regulate many of the rules of guardianship and custody in the new Personal Status Law No. 36 of 2010, issued on 17/10/2010.

The author intends, to the best of their ability, to present these rules in full, including those introduced by the new law, by addressing the forms of representation in (Part One), then discussing the effects of representation in (Part Two), after first covering some basic knowledge about representation in an (Introductory Chapter).

ISBN: 9789957167776, Weight: 0.700 kg, Size: 17×24 cm, Paper: White, Pages: 288, Year of Publication: 2012, Binding: Hardcover