The fundamental differences between "Non-contractual indebtedness" and "civil liability" in terms of foundations, pillars and rules

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor at University of Guilan

2 Ph.D. in Private Law, Qom Mofid Uni

10.22099/jls.2023.45191.4851

Abstract

What is studied under the title of "Non-contractual indebtedness" in jurisprudence is interpreted as "civil liability" in modern law. Despite some similarities, there is a substantive difference between them that "Non-contractual indebtedness" in jurisprudence is one of the causes of ownership and "civil liability" is one of the causes of obligation in Romano Germanic legal system. The importance of the issue becomes more apparent when we see a dual approach in this regard in Iranian law. The Civil Code and the Islamic Penal Code have expressed the relevant issues under the influence of jurisprudence and under the title of "Non-contractual indebtedness" and on the other hand, we are faced with the "Civil Liability" Code, which follows the Romano Germanic legal system. The present article with a descriptive and analytical method specifically seeks to identify the answer to the question, what are the differences between "Non-contractual indebtedness" and "civil liability"? And in other words, what are the consequences of this duality? The research shows that the aforementioned substantive distinction has many consequences in the basis, pillars and rulings of these two. For example, although the basis of "civil liability"; There is fault, the basis of "Non-contractual indebtedness" is respect for a believer's property or the realm of compensable damage, and the criterion of causation in these two has serious differences.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Journal of Legal Studies

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 15 November 2023

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics