Sometimes, after the conclusion of the contract, events occur that fail the purpose of the parties in the contract and make its implementation fruitless for one or both parties to the transaction. This assumption is examined in common law under the "Doctrine of Frustration of Purpose", according to which the party whose purpose of the contract fails is exempted from fulfilling the obligation. There is no independent chapter in Islamic and Iranian law on this subject, but is it possible to accept such a view according to the jurisprudential principles and principles of Iranian law? At first glance, it may seem difficult to invoke this theory in Islamic jurisprudence and Iranian law in order to counter the principle of Pacta sunt servanda. However, a careful study of jurisprudential sources and the criteria of legal materials shows that this doctrine can be invoked like common law. This article uses descriptive-analytical and inferential methods to clarify the conditions and approach to which this theory can be cited in Islamic jurisprudence and Iranian law.