Private Law
Mahmoud Kazemi; Ali Ghesmati Tabrizi
Abstract
What happens if more than one person is blamed for causing an injury? It is clear that the liability must be divided between them, but the problem is the criterion of apportionment. Should the liability be apportioned equally or differently? If the latter is true, how the share of anyone is determined? ...
Read More
What happens if more than one person is blamed for causing an injury? It is clear that the liability must be divided between them, but the problem is the criterion of apportionment. Should the liability be apportioned equally or differently? If the latter is true, how the share of anyone is determined? In foreign legal systems, there are different ideas in this regard, and finally, it is up to the court to apportion the damages fairly. Islamic law has accepted the theory of equality of liability. After the approval of the Islamic Penal Code, this view entered into the law of Iran, but the jurisprudence with the justification that the theory of equality is based on the assumption of the equal effect of each of the tortfeasors accepted the possibility of proving otherwise and accordingly, each share was determined based on the extent of its impact on the occurrence of loss. The Islamic Penal Code in 1992, under the influence of existing doctrine and jurisprudence, accepted this view in Articles 526 and 527, while in Articles 453, 528, and 533, the theory of equality of responsibility has been followed. In this article, we have tried to explain the foundation of the theory of equality in Fiqh and its results in interpreting the Islamic Penal Code.
Private Law
Abbas Mirshkari; FatemehSadat Hosseini
Abstract
Moral loss is a kind of harm which damages the person,s non-financial right. At first, there was doubt about the possibility of compensation for this type of loss. For example, in the USA legal system, they did not pay enough attention to victim,s moral losses as they do for financial losses. It was ...
Read More
Moral loss is a kind of harm which damages the person,s non-financial right. At first, there was doubt about the possibility of compensation for this type of loss. For example, in the USA legal system, they did not pay enough attention to victim,s moral losses as they do for financial losses. It was argued that moral damages are not visible and so we don’t know the real loss and we should trust just to the victim. In addition, the lack of a structured method of compensation and assessment, makes this kind of loss, secondary damages. How ever, especially, using the psychology Science, courts gradually began to accept moral damages.In Iran, Also there was doubt about moral damages. But today Due to the criminal procedure code which approved in 1392, the compensation for moral damages is acceptable. But what is still vague, is the method. How ever, it seems using some methods like apologize or financial compensation are more practical.Ofcourse in each case this is the judge who should recognize which approach is better and proportional to the plaintiff and his personal loss. In this article we try to study the methods of moral compensation in Iran legal system, and we will use the American studies about this subject and also the cases which raised in Iran judicial procedure.
Private Law
hamid afkar; abdollah khodabakhshi
Abstract
Being the litigant of the insurer together with the responsible for the accident is legally and economically justifiable for the injured party, but explaining the responsibility of multiple defendants to pay a single debt is one of the problems of the judge in issuing a verdict; In such a way that in ...
Read More
Being the litigant of the insurer together with the responsible for the accident is legally and economically justifiable for the injured party, but explaining the responsibility of multiple defendants to pay a single debt is one of the problems of the judge in issuing a verdict; In such a way that in some cases the subject of litigation to one of the defendants is silenced or the litigation is completely rejected. The purpose of this study is to explain the position of the insurer and the person who caused the accident in the lawsuit with descriptive and analytical methods, in addition to recognizing the need to decide on each of them, to explain their responsibility in the sentence and to provide logical theories for compensation. The inference of the independent or collective liability of the insured and the insurer is based on various reasons. Sharing liability between the insured and the insurer has no logical or legal basis, and the liability of the insurer's collateral does not serve the purpose of better compensating the injured party. The court’s waiting for invoking the injured party to the insurance contract also does not solve the problem of explaining the liability of multiple defendants, and differences in the type and amount of liability remain. Recognition of joint and several liability of the insured and the insurer in the Compulsory Insurance Law adopted in 2016 is compatible with the aim of better guaranteeing the injured party, and some law bases and legal justifications justify the need for the theory of joint and several liability of the insurer and person who caused the accident.
Private Law
Shirzad Heidari Shabaz; Mohsen Mohebi; Gholamali Seifi Zeinab,
Abstract
Driverless cars have made the jump from fantasy to the physical realm and their use is increasing day after day. In their most advanced form, a driving system is replaced with a human driver which takes control of the vehicle when driving. Regardless of the conventional issues of civil liability, what ...
Read More
Driverless cars have made the jump from fantasy to the physical realm and their use is increasing day after day. In their most advanced form, a driving system is replaced with a human driver which takes control of the vehicle when driving. Regardless of the conventional issues of civil liability, what draws attention in the first place is the mechanism of compensation for accidents caused by these driverless vehicles. Therefore, the main question that we seek to answer in this article is: If the responsibility of the insurer is based on social cooperation, can the system of compensation for damages caused by automobile accidents that currently prevails in Iran's legal system be responsible for the compensation of damages caused by such automobile accidents? Relying on the descriptive-analytical method of research and the use of library resources, this article has reached the conclusion that the compensation system outlined in the Compulsory Insurance Law of 2016 which is based on social cooperation can handle this important issue, although it needs to be developed.
Private Law
Abbas Karimi; Mohammad Hadi javaherkalam
Abstract
In this article, the facilitation of causation in medical accidents has been studied comparatively in Iranian and French law with an emphasis on the jurisprudence of the two countries. The purpose of this study was to show the constructive role of French judicial procedure in the evolution of the legal ...
Read More
In this article, the facilitation of causation in medical accidents has been studied comparatively in Iranian and French law with an emphasis on the jurisprudence of the two countries. The purpose of this study was to show the constructive role of French judicial procedure in the evolution of the legal system of this country and to provide constructive solutions to facilitate causation in medical accidents and to use the solutions provided for the Iranian legal and judicial system. By descriptive-analytical research method and by studying jurisprudence, it was concluded that French courts have facilitated the causal relationship by using the presumption of attribution of damages or causality, the negation of other causes, equality of causes and conditions and the theory of loss of opportunity. The jurisprudence of our country has also used some of these solutions, although in a more limited way and mainly in the case of infected blood. However, further use of these legal solutions is necessary in our country to establish a causal relationship in various areas of medical accidents and compensation of victims. Therefore, the use of these solutions as a judicial authority is proposed to the courts.
Private Law
Mohammadkaezem Mahtabpoor
Abstract
Determining the liability basis of professionals (such as doctors, lawyers and engeeniers), is one of the most important matters in different legal systems. The problem regarding determing the liability of these people is, on one hand, the differences exist between service providng and product manufacturing ...
Read More
Determining the liability basis of professionals (such as doctors, lawyers and engeeniers), is one of the most important matters in different legal systems. The problem regarding determing the liability of these people is, on one hand, the differences exist between service providng and product manufacturing which makes it difficult to provide a general principle regarding civil liability for all of them. On the other hand, their clients, due to lack of science and skill, could not prove professionals’ fault.The social responsibility of these people, make determing the basis of their liability, more harsh.Although in both French and Common law legal systems, the main theory regarding the professionals’ liability is based on fault, there is some solutions to impose strict liability in some cases in order to protect their clients. Knowing this solutions and ocalizing them, will lead us to the general principle of professionals’ liability under Iranian legal system.In order to sloved the aforementioned problem in Iranian legal system and for the porpuse of balancing between professionals’ liability and social responsibility (mossion), in case service providing ends in goods manufacturing, such as architect and pharmesict, “Etlaf” and “Tasbib” shall be considered as the basis of the liability. In case of mere service providing, where there is a breach of an “obligation by result”, no- fault liability and where there is a breach of an “obligation by means”, fault base liability seems suitable. Any loss to third parties is included in the latter one.
Private Law
Hosein Javaheri mohammadi
Abstract
The outbreak of the coronavirus was first reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019, and gradually spread to the rest of the world, including Iran. Among the effects of this epidemic are the hardening, frustration, and impossibility of contractual obligations, which are discussed under the Hardship, ...
Read More
The outbreak of the coronavirus was first reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019, and gradually spread to the rest of the world, including Iran. Among the effects of this epidemic are the hardening, frustration, and impossibility of contractual obligations, which are discussed under the Hardship, Frustration, and force majeure, respectively. Of these excuses, our legal system has only accepted the explicit criteria governing the Force Majeure, which is also based on the impossibility of the commitment. the months-long experience of countries and the comments of official national judicial authorities indicate a tendency to accept the maximum of coronavirus conditions as Force Majeure. The corona pandemic and its limitations are temporary in nature. In the meantime, however, it will be necessary to consider the type of commitment in terms of unity or plurality of the desired, with this explanation that in cases of unity of the desired, the conditions resulting from coronavirus will essentially lead to the termination of the contract and the discharge of the obligation, as opposed to the multiplicity of the desired, which temporarily impedes the suspension of the restrained part and the retention of the obligation in the possible parts. Predictability of legal prohibitions due to corona outbreak has discharged a wide spectrum of corona-driven conditions from the title of Force Majeure. Ultimately, it is the judge who must have to state if they meet the conditions of Force Majeure, and the mere declaration of a state of emergency by national and international authorities will have no effect on its realization in single cases. However, the legislature's intervention in determining the legal status of obligations that have become hard-to-perform due to corona pandemic, results in judges not needing to rely heavily on secondary rules such as principle of “la zarar” or “la haraj” principle” of hardship.
Private Law
mohsen Borhani; Arash Badkoubeh Hezaveh
Abstract
Causation is one of the most significant topics of law, if not the most important one. This article analyzes the validity of expert opinion in determining establishment of causation and peripheral issues of causation. Iranian courts routinely delegate the recognition of causation establishment to governmental ...
Read More
Causation is one of the most significant topics of law, if not the most important one. This article analyzes the validity of expert opinion in determining establishment of causation and peripheral issues of causation. Iranian courts routinely delegate the recognition of causation establishment to governmental experts, regardless of whether there is any legal basis justifying such reference. This article answers the following inquiry: “According to Iranian law, in what cases, if any, courts can rely on expert opinion in determining whether Causation is established for purpose of imposing liability?” This article assumes that a criterion should be implemented/designed to recognize establishment of causation based on a customary standard. Although in certain cases, establishment of causation and in some peripheral issues related to the causation, namely recognition of material causes and amount of damages (in the cases of shared liability), expert opinion could be the sole basis for determinate establishment of causation.
Private Law
sajjad shahbaz ghahfarrokhi
Abstract
After adopting the theory of contributory negligence and dismissing the All-or-Nothing Rule, the issue of how to determine the extent of loss and victim fault was raised in fault-based civil liability. The key question is whether there is a difference between the defendant's fault and the plaintiff's. ...
Read More
After adopting the theory of contributory negligence and dismissing the All-or-Nothing Rule, the issue of how to determine the extent of loss and victim fault was raised in fault-based civil liability. The key question is whether there is a difference between the defendant's fault and the plaintiff's. If the same act has been done by both sides and the other essential elements are the same, should the responsibility be equally shared by the two perpetrators, regardless of whether they are plaintiff or defendant? The European principles of civic responsibility and the prevailing theory of common law have adopted a "symmetrical approach to victim and defendant's behavior in determining each one's fault" and equally, have considered the standard of reasonable care in evaluating their behavior. This view has been tempered in various ways and certain exceptions have been made to it in the Common law legal system. Similarly, from the point of view of economic analysis and moral criticism, there are some objections to this theory. This view, despite its popularity, seems to have left much criticism unanswered. In depicting an apt theory to address this issue, it will count as a step forward to explain and criticize the mainstream theory.
Private Law
Mansour Akbari Araei; reza nikkhah; siamak jafarzadeh
Abstract
One way of mental damage compensation is apology. Apology plays an important role in healing mental and emotional pain of victims and has a detrimental effect on their relationship with the wrongdoer. This has been the subject of legislative attention in the Iranian law and in case of mental damage article ...
Read More
One way of mental damage compensation is apology. Apology plays an important role in healing mental and emotional pain of victims and has a detrimental effect on their relationship with the wrongdoer. This has been the subject of legislative attention in the Iranian law and in case of mental damage article 10 of the Civil Liability Act gives the court the authority to force the wrongdoer to apologize for the loss. However, apology has not yet been defined and its terms has not considered in the country’s laws. Other countries such as Canada and the US are the leading countries in this case and have used the apology as a tool to relieve mental pains. A lot of research has been done for defining and explaining the term “apology” till now. In this research we’ll study the notion and terms of apology and its role in mental damage compensation of the victim and its effects on wrongdoer behavior and also the process of apology in the court. In conclusion, on one hand, the Iranian legislator must define the apology and on the other hand, the role of judicial procedure must be emphasized so that apology will become one of the methods of spiritual compensation if necessary.
