Background and Objective: In Iranian law, oral sale is supported by the consensual nature of contracts and the principles of Imamiyyah jurisprudence, yet its proof often leads to disputes in courts. This study examines the status of oral sale in Iranian law and the judicial approach to its validity and effects.

Materials and Methods: This is a theoretical study conducted through a descriptive-analytical method.

Findings: In Iranian law, oral sale is in principle valid, and the formation of the contract depends on the parties’ mutual consent rather than a written document. However, judicial practice accepts such sale only when supported by consistent evidence and indicia, such as possession, payment of the price, witness testimony, ordinary documents, and the parties’ conduct after the agreement. Court decisions also show a distinction between the substantive validity of the contract and the enforceability of its effects, especially regarding registered immovable property.

Ethical Considerations: Throughout the research, originality, honesty, and fidelity to sources were observed.

Conclusion: Oral sale is valid between the parties, but its practical effect in litigation depends on sufficient proof and compliance with registration requirements. Thus, Iranian judicial practice adopts a balanced approach that preserves both party consent and legal certainty.