Civil participation contract is one of the highly used methods in banking resources allocation. Using this method in Islamic banking is contingent upon the jurisprudential measures and standards’ being observed in the phase of concluding and enforcing the contract. Given the problems in the contracts between banks and their customers, Iranian central bank, in 1392, formulated civil participation contract as a uniform one and ordered the banks to enforce it.
Our main question, here, is that whether this contract formulated by the central bank is consistent with the general and special regulations of transactions. Using descriptive and content analysis method, and examining the sources of Imamiah jurisprudence, the present article tries to prove the hypothesis that although it has been tried to observe the jurisprudential rules in formulating the civil participation contract, it still suffers from some important defects, neglecting which will undermine the contract’s legitimacy. The results imply that inconsistency with the contract’s necessities, illegitimately earning property, and profit guaranteeing provision’s being usurious are some of the important defects of the contract, which could be resolved exploiting proper solutions.