Analysis of definite condition for compensable loss in Iran and France

Authors

  • Esmat Mokhlesabadi Farahani Shahre-Ghods Branch, Islamic Azad University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24200/jsshr.vol3iss03pp9-12

Abstract

Civil liability in law of obligations refers to a title to elaborate legal requirements for compensation of undue losses. Compensation of undue losses requires for the conditions such as definite condition for compensable loss which is contractual liability discussed in contractual liability. According to this condition, it must prove that a property has been destroyed and/or a benefit has lost, that is, a benefit that will bring into the owner if the harmer did not harm, because the decree for compensation of loss is not true. Methodology: Under this condition in realization of liability, the theory for loss of opportunity is one of the issues discussed on definite condition for compensable loss, such that a person sometimes loses the opportunity to gain benefit or avoid loss in future due to another person's fault. It is asked whether a person affected by this issue can ask for compensation of loss with definite condition for compensable loss. Results: In this regard, an attempt has been made in the present research to elaborate the theory for loss of opportunity with definite condition for compensable loss using descriptive and analytical method and the library method besides analysis of definite condition for compensable loss in positive laws of Iran and France. Conclusion: According to the investigations, the procedure in France has accepted the principle under compensation of loss considering definite condition for compensable loss. Iran's law regarding analogy of some of the articles in contractual liability law including article 6 of this law has stated that loss of an opportunity is a definite loss which must be compensated. 

References

Ali-Abadi, A, 2009. Creating obligations arising from contracts in Islamic law, danesh pazir publications

Amini, M., Nateghenoori, S., 2011. Comparative study of the theory of loss of chance, Overview of Europe and the United States of America, Journal of Comparative Law, 15(3), 12-20.

Aslani, H.R., 2006. Status of the blame in contractual liability, Journal of Theology and Law, 14, 25-34.

Barati, M., 2015, Legislator, personal principle of sanctions, Tehran, Majd publication

Jaffari Langroodi, M.J., 1994. Law terminology, khajeh Publication, Tehran

Joren, P., 2012. Principles of civil liability with the votes of the French Supreme Court, The translation of literary, trans-Majid Adib, Tehran , Mizan publication

Katoozian, N., 1996. The requirements out of the contract (liability compulsory), Tehran University Press

Katoozian, N., 1998. Civil rights, obligations out of the kcontract, the liability enforcement, Tehran University Institute Press

Kazemi, M., 2003. Theory of loss of chance in civil liability, Faculty of Law and Political Science, 53

Novin, P., 2012. Civil liability comparative civil rights, Ganj danesh publication

Parisi, F., Palmer, V. V., & Bussani, M. 2007. The comparative law and economics of pure economic loss. International Review of Law and Economics, 27(1), 29-48.

Shahidi, M., 2012. Works of contracts and obligations, Fifth Edition, Majd publication

Downloads

Published

2019-08-10

Issue

Section

Articles