Background and Aim: The rules governing conflict resolution in electronic contract claims are very important. This law, which often does not provide the interests of the person, is the law of the country of the internet business owner. The purpose of this article is to examine the rules governing conflict resolution in electronic contract claims in Iranian and European law.
Materials and Methods: This article is descriptive and analytical. Materials and data are also qualitative and data collection was used in collecting materials and data.
Ethical Considerations: In this article, the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness are respected.
Findings: The findings showed that in Iran, according to the principle of territoriality, we should consider the laws of Iran as governing the contracts. Since the provisions of Iran's civil law regarding contractual obligations are optional, the rule of conflict that considers contractual obligations to be subject to the law of the place of conclusion of the contract should be considered an optional rule, and the regime of choice of governing law in the European Union is mixed.
Conclusion: In Iranian law, the contracting parties can agree that the obligations arising from the contract are subject to Iranian law, but if the contract is concluded outside of Iran, the parties can consider the contract to be subject to another law by explicit or implicit agreement.