نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی تهران؛ ایران
2 دانشیار دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی تهران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The study of Iranians’ tort related writings explicates that most of the top jurists believe that there is a maxim called “the principle of full compensation”. Provided that the other two requirements of liability (causation and harmful act) exist, this principle states that all damages, regardless of their type, should be compensated without any need for a specific law prescribing the liability to compensate that kind of damage. Case law is in doubt on how to react to this principle and has since taken two different approaches. Contrary to popular belief, however, our search in the philosophical foundations (and also in the main goals of tort law) shows that there is no theory that stays adamant about compensating all kinds of damages in any circumstances. From only one theory we can infer such a principle, but because of some major defects in this conclusion, it has been widely criticized by tort law philosophers.It seems that the belief in such a principle (of full compensation) is not acceptable neither practically nor theoretically; it is unfeasible in practicality and reduces the power of tort law in organizing and arranging different kinds of social activities, and it is theoretically unsubstantiated. In this article, I propound this idea that invoking this principle should be avoided by our jurists, and as well as our courts.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
بابایی، ایرج (1384) «نقد اصل قابلیت جبران کلیه خسارات در حقوق مسئولیت مدنی ایران»؛ فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق عمومی، دوره 7، تابستان، شماره 16، صص 83 – 45.
بابایی، ایرج (1394) حقوق مسئولیت مدنی و الزامات خارج از قرارداد، تهران: نشر میزان.
بادینی، حسن (1383) «هدف مسئولیت مدنی»، مجله دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، دوره 66، زمستان، شماره پیاپی 520، صص 113 - 55.
بادینی، حسن (1384) فلسفه مسئولیت مدنی، بی‌جا: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
باریکلو، علیرضا (1385) مسئولیت مدنی، تهران: نشر میزان.
بهرامی احمدی، حمید (1390) قواعد فقه؛ ج 2، قاعده لا ضرر، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه امام صادق.
بهرامی احمدی، حمید (1393) ضمان قهری، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه امام صادق.
خادم سربخش، مهدی و سلطانی نژاد، هدایت الله (1392) «اصل قابلیت جبران کلیه خسارات»، مبانی فقهی حقوق اسلامی، سال ششم، پاییز و زمستان، شماره دوازدهم، صص 48 - 21.
داراب پور، مهراب (1387) مسئولیت‌های خارج از قرارداد، تهران: مجمع علمی و فرهنگی مجد.
صفایی، سید حسین و رحیمی، حبیب‌الله (1393) مسئولیت مدنی، تهران: انتشارات سمت.
صفایی، سید حسین و رحیمی، حبیب‌الله (1397) مسئولیت مدنی تطبیقی، تهران: مؤسسه مطالعات و پژوهش‌های حقوقی شهر دانش.
قربان‌نیا، ناصر (1377) «مطالعه‌ای پیرامون مسؤولیت مدنی دولت در فقه امامیه و حقوق موضوعه»، نامه مفید؛ شماره 13، صص 166- 133.
کاتوزیان، ناصر (1385) حقوق مدنی، الزام‌های خارج از قرارداد، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
مبیّن، حجت (1390) نظریه قابلیت استناد در مبانی مسئولیت مدنی، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه امام صادق.
مهمان‌نوازان، روح‌الله (1390) خسارات قابل جبران در حقوق ایران؛ تهران: مجمع علمی و فرهنگی مجد.
یزدانیان، علیرضا (1386) قواعد عمومی مسئولیت مدنی، تهران: نشر میزان.
http://j.ijri.ir/SubSystems/Jpri2/Showjudgement.aspx?id=VTNpdldkaXlIczA9
http://j.ijri.ir/SubSystems/Jpri2/Showjudgement.aspx?id=S2VxVU16SU9weG89
http://j.ijri.ir/SubSystems/Jpri2/Showjudgement.aspx?id=NEo0Ym9vL29EOEE9
http://j.ijri.ir/SubSystems/Jpri2/Showjudgement.aspx?id=SWJYM0RPY3hWYmM9
http://j.ijri.ir/SubSystems/Jpri2/Showjudgement.aspx?id=eTNHZlVtRHRYTGs9
http://j.ijri.ir/SubSystems/Jpri2/Showjudgement.aspx?id=ckFoSXJsTkxHMzQ9
Abraham, Kenneth S. (2007) The Forms and Functions of Tort Law; New York: Foundation Press.
Blum, Walter J. and Kalven, Harry (1965) "Public Law Perspectives on a Private Law Problem: Auto Compensation Plans", The University of Chicago Law Review, Vo1. 31, No. 4, pp. 641-723.
Calabresi, Guido (1961) "Some Thoughts on Risk Distribution and the Law of Torts", Yale Law Journal, Vol. 70, No. 4, pp. 499-553.
Calabresi, Guido (1970) The Costs of Accidents: A Legal and Economic Analysis, New Haven: Yale University Press.
Calabresi, Guido & Hirschoff, Jon T. (1972) "Toward a Test of Strict Liability in Torts", Yale Law Journal, Vol. 81, No. 6, pp. 1055-1085.
Calabresi, Guido (2003) "An Introduction to Legal Thought: Four Approaches to Law and to the Allocation of Body Parts", Stanford Law Review, Vol. 55, June, pp. 2113-2151.
Chapman, Bruce (2001) Pluralism in Tort and Accident Law, in Philosophy and the Law of Torts, Gerald J. Postema as editor, Cambridge University Press.
Coase, Ronald H. (1960) "The Problem of Social Cost", Journal Of Law And Economics, Vol. 3, pp. 1-44.
Coleman, Jules l. (1992) Risks and Wrongs, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cooter, Robert & Ulen, Thomas (2012) Law and Economics; Boston: Addisson-Wesley.
Dewees, Don; Duff, David; Trebilcock, Michael J. (1996) Exploring the Domain of Accident Law: Taking the Facts Seriously, New York: Oxford University Press.
Dobbs, Dan b. (2011) The Law of Torts; Saint Paul, Minnesota: West Group.
Englard, Izhak (1980) "The System Builders: A Critical Appraisal of Modern American Tort Law", Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 27-69.
Englard, Izhak (1990) "Victor Mataja’s Liability for Damages from an Economic Viewpoint: A Centennial to an Ignored Economic Analysis of Tort"; International Review of Law and Economics, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 173-191.
Englard, Izhak (1993) the Philosophy of Tort Law; Dartmouth Publishing Company.
Green, Jerry (1976) "On the Optimal Structure of Liability Laws", Bell Journal of Economics; Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 553-574.
Grossman, Peter Z. Cearley, Reed W. Cole, Daniel H. (2006) "Uncertainty, Insurance and the Learned Hand formula, Law", Probability and Risk, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1-18.
Holmes, Oliver Wendell Jr. (1991) The Common Law, Dover Publications; Retrieved March 09, (2021); Available at: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2449/2449-h/2449-h.htm
Keating, Gregory (1997) "The Idea of Fairness in the Law of Enterprise Liability", Michigan Law Review, Vol. 95, No. 5, pp. 1266-1380.
Perry, Stephen R. (1992) "The Moral Foundations of Tort Law"; Iowa Law Review, Vol. 77, pp. 449-514.
Perry, Ronen (2015) “Pluralistic Legal Theories: In Search of a Common Denominator”, Tulane Law Review, Vol. 90, No. 1, pp. 647-669.
Porat, Ariel (2007) “Offsetting Risks”, Michigan Law Review, Vol. 106, No. 2, pp. 243-276.
Posner, Richard A. (1972) “A Theory of Negligence”, Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 29-96.
Posner, Richard A. (1975) “The Economic Approach to Law”, Texas Law Review, Vol. 53, pp. 757-782.
Posner, Richard A. (1980) “The Value of Wealth: A Comment on Dworkin and Kronman”, Journal Of Legal Studies, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 243-252.
Priest, George (1987) “Modern Tort Law and Its Reform”, Valparaiso University Law Review, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 1-38.
Robinette, Christopher J. (2005) “Can There Be a Unified Theory of Torts? A Pluralist Suggestion from History and Doctrine”, Brandeis Law Journal, Vol. 43, pp. 369-414.
Rogers, W. V. H. (2002) Winfield and Jolowicz on Torts, London: Sweet & Maxwell.
Schroeder, Christopher H. (1990) “Corrective Justice and Liability for Increasing Risks”, UCLA Law Review; Vol. 37, pp. 439-478.
Weinrib, Ernest J. (1989) “Right and Advantage in Private Law”, Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 1283-1309.
Weinrib, Ernest J. (1992) “Corrective Justice”, Iowa Law Review, Vol. 77, pp. 403-426.
Weinrib, Ernest J. (1994) “The Gains and Losses of Corrective Justice”, Duke Law Journal, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 277-297.
Weinrib, Ernest J. (1995) The Idea of Private Law, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Weinrib, Ernest J. (2001) “Correlativity, Personality, and the Emerging Consensus on Corrective Justice”, Theoretical Inquiries Law, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 107-159.
Weinrib, Ernest J. (2012) Corrective Justice, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Williams, Glanville L. (1951) The Aims of the Law of Tort, 4 Current Legal Problems, has been printed again in Lunney, Mark & Oliphant, KEN (2008) Tort Law: Text & Materials, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
)