<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<ArticleSet>
  <Article>
    <Journal>
      <PublisherName></PublisherName>
      <JournalTitle>Legal Studies in Digital Age</JournalTitle>
      <Issn></Issn>
      <Volume></Volume>
      <Issue>In Press</Issue>
      <PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
        <Year>2026</Year>
        <Month>11</Month>
        <Day>01</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </Journal>
    <ArticleTitle>AI-Fabricated Legal Personality: Agency Without Intent and the Legal Effects of Contracts</ArticleTitle>
    <VernacularTitle>AI-Fabricated Legal Personality: Agency Without Intent and the Legal Effects of Contracts</VernacularTitle>
    <FirstPage>1</FirstPage>
    <LastPage>14</LastPage>
    <Language>EN</Language>
    <AuthorList>
      <Author>
        <FirstName></FirstName>
        <LastName></LastName>
        <Affiliation></Affiliation>
      </Author>
    </AuthorList>
    <PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
    <History>
      <PubDate PubStatus="received">
        <Year>2026</Year>
        <Month>03</Month>
        <Day>01</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </History>
    <Abstract>&lt;p&gt;The expansion of generative models and autonomous artificial intelligence agents has given rise to an emerging form of forgery: the creation or appropriation of the identities of natural and legal persons and the conclusion of contracts in their names without any underlying human intent. Using an analytical-critical method and a comparative approach, this article first demonstrates why the fundamental concepts of legal personality, capacity, and agency in Iranian law are founded upon attributable intent and why the statistical output of an algorithm cannot be accommodated within any of these legal categories. It then examines the legal status of contracts concluded under machine-generated false identities and concludes that such contracts are absolutely void due to the absence of contractual intent and legal capacity, although invalidity alone provides no adequate remedy for a good-faith contracting party. The article makes two principal contributions. First, it develops a three-stage test for the attribution of liability, designed to allocate losses among the developer, operator, and intermediary platform on the basis of the legal doctrines of inducement, direct destruction of property, and indirect causation. Second, it formulates the paradigm of an “advanced instrument accompanied by a chain of liability,” which addresses existing legal gaps without conferring legal personality upon machines. Finally, ten legislative, technical, and institutional measures are proposed for the Iranian legal system.&lt;/p&gt;</Abstract>
    <ObjectList>
      <Object Type="keyword">
        <Param Name="value">artificial intelligence, identity forgery, legal personality, contractual intent, civil liability, electronic contract.</Param>
      </Object>
    </ObjectList>
    <ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://www.jlsda.com/index.php/lsda/article/download/445/372</ArchiveCopySource>
  </Article>
</ArticleSet>
