جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « moral damage » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

The imposition of sanctions against Iran over many years has impacted crucial economic sectors, including the banking, energy, and industry as well as the health and medical systems and the scientific field of the country, leading to significant losses for natural and legal persons and raised questions regarding the methods of compensating and evaluating these damages. This research explores the forms of compensation in domestic and international law and examines the evaluation of material, moral and punitive damages. The compensation methods in domestic and international law generally follow a similar approach. Material damages can be compensated financially, whereas moral damages might not be adequately addressed through financial means alone; in such cases, non-financial methods like formal apologies, acceptance of violations, and expressing regret are utilized. Material damages can be evaluated with high accuracy using case-by-case criteria, ensuring the rights of the victims are not violated, and macroeconomic variables can be applied in extensive lawsuits. For moral damages, due to the complexity of calculating, a mixed criterion is preferable. Finally, in assessing punitive damages, the prolonged and severe impact of sanctions, along with the extent of material and moral damages, should considered.

In the case being examined, the plaintiffs are a couple whose first child was born with a genetic disease and some doctors forbade them from having a second pregnancy. Because of this advice, the said couple consult two other doctors. These doctors considered the risk of the second child having a genetic disease to be low and therefore judge the ban on further pregnancy to be unfounded. Trusting the latter advice, the mentioned couple attempt to have another child. Following the pregnancy, the aforementioned doctors, after examining the relevant tests, declare the fetus to be healthy and disease-free. However, unfortunately, following the birth of the second child, it becomes clear that, just like his sibling, is also sick. As a result, the parents are forced to bear the heavy costs of maintaining the sick child and the suffering having such an offspring entail. Following these events, the said couple initiate a lawsuit for compensation of material and moral damages. Relying on the opinion of experts, the trial judge determines an amount based on blood money to compensate for material and moral damages, which ruling is also confirmed by the appeals court.In this article, an attempt is made to examine the basis of the civil liability of defendants, the elements of their civil liability, and finally, the way to compensate damages. The researches of this study showed that a doctor who is unable to carry out his mission correctly within the limits of human knowledge and technical facilities, will be responsible to the people who have referred to him to determine the path of their destiny. The doctor's responsibility in this assumption can be imagined based on the rule of pride. He made other/others proud of the health of the fetus, as a result, if his statement is proven to be false, he must be responsible for the damages caused by the birth of the sick child. Undoubtedly, the birth of such a child will result in material (maintenance and possibly treatment) and spiritual (discomfort and mental suffering) losses for his parents. As a result, although the current judicial procedure tends to use the dowry as a basis for compensating these losses, however, it seems that relying on the dowry is worth considering, especially that the dowry itself is based on the assumption The damage has been established and it is doubtful whether it corresponds to the actual amount of physical damage, let alone whether it is a basis for compensation for material and spiritual losses. For this reason, it is suggested to the judicial procedure, in such cases, the necessary expenses for the maintenance and treatment of children such as a sick child are calculated and the cause of the loss is condemned to pay these expenses continuously (and not once). In order to compensate for the moral loss, it seems that the judge should consider the most suitable method for compensating the moral loss according to the circumstances of the case.

Private information of individuals is always exposed to attack by different individuals. Therefore, while providing a criterion for identifying the concept of private information, by strengthening the guarantee of the enforcement of the violation of the rights of individuals to their private information, a way should be found to prevent the violation of information privacy. The main question is whether the civil liability resulting from the violation of privacy is recognized in British and Iranian law or not? If the answer is positive, how is this supported? In English law, there was no independent form of civil liability claim arising from a breach of informational privacy and due to the formality of the British civil liability system, a lawsuit that directly protects privacy was not acceptable until after Campbell's lawsuit was filed in 2004, the grounds for accepting an independent civil liability lawsuit known as misuse of private information was provided. Also, in the Judicial procedure of this country, the standard of reasonable expectation of privacy (objective standard) has been used to determine whether information is private. In Iranian law, privacy violation is in any form, regardless of whether it is in a specific format. If there are conditions of civil liability, in this case, the defendant is responsible. Of course, the appearance of the Executive Regulations of the Law on Publishing and Free Access to Information only uses the phrase "expectation of privacy" without the condition of "reasonableness" in recognizing the existence of privacy, and this issue apparently confirms that a subjective standard is accepted in Iranian law. However, considering the advantages of the objective standard, this appearance should be ignored and the objective standard should be recognized in Iranian law. Anyway, the mission of this article is to analyze the standard of reasonable expectation of privacy in an analytical-descriptive way and with a comparative view, while examining the conditions of creating civil liability due to misuse of private information.

Civil liability and compensation for moral damages are important issues that have always been considered by lawyers. Compensation for damages of a damaged person is an important principle which a legislator should paid special attention. The issue of beauty defects is one of the important and common examples of moral damage in today's society. This means a person loses his/her appearance and beauty for various reasons, and this causes psychological damage and isolation. However, the difference in compensation for spiritual damage and the difficulty of its assessment causes inadequacies. To undertake this line of research, methods of compensation for moral damages have been addressed using the descriptive-analytical method. As a result, among the methods presented for compensation of the moral damages, the methods of restitutio in integrum, equivalent compensation, symbolic compensation, and punitive damages can be noted. The findings of the study reveal that the compensation methods in the Iranian legal system is inefficient. Therefore, attention has been proposed to the injured party in the method of compensation. It seems presenting a new methods can facilitate peace of mind for the damaged. Thus, one may achieve the main goal of damage compensation.

One of the controversial issues in Iranian legal system and judicial precedent is the permissibility or impermissibility of compensation for moral damages through the payment of money, which has been recognized in the latest reforms. Relying on Article 14 of the Criminal Procedure Act and its notes, which have also been approved by the Guardian Council, the court can, in addition to rendering a judgment to compensate for financial damages, compensate the damages by other means, such as requiring an accused to apologize and publishing a judgment in a newspaper and so on. Believing that the principle is to compensate for moral damages and Note 2 of Article 14 of the above-mentioned Act lies outside the crimes leads to retaliation and relying on fault and failure to act in a timely manner to inform and by the relevant and related concerned organizations and development of the government's civil responsibility, the court in judgment No. 140168390002642107 dated 2/31/1401 rendered by the 12th branch of the Provencial Appellate Court of Tehran, sentenced four public and government organizations to compensation. This judgment while is bold and defensible in this respect, it is challengeable in terms of non-compliance with some legal regulations, including the method of ascertaining and attributing the accident, the method of distributing responsibility, the method of assessing the amount of damage caused and the duty to pay it continuously, etc and it is considered the weakness of the judgement.

Judges make mistakes in the issuance or the sentence or in rendering of judgment and according to the Article 171 of Constitution, they cause material or moral spiritual harm to innocent people. In the case of fault, the judges are obliged to compensate the damage and if there is no fault, the government is obliged to compensate the damage.In any case, restoration of prestige mist be claimed from the accused. Therefore, the purpose of present study is to assess the feasibility of compensation. This is descriptive analytical article and has investigated the issue using the library method.Ethical Ethical Considerations: In present study, the princilples of text originality,honesty and trustworthiness have been observed. Compensation is of spiritual, material, and possible benefit type. Perviously, there was ambiguity regarding financial compensation.  Such as compensation in the preliminary stage and proof of fault. But now the new Code of Criminal Procedure has approved this matter. Given the present ambiguity in compensation caused by judge mistake, the unified judicial precedent No 791 was formed and it can be concluded that not only in preliminary stage but also in a stage of determining the punishment, the judge does not take responsibility for compensation for the damage caused by mistake.

In this article, the conditions of moral damages in the case of legal entities have been carefully considered. Perhaps the conditions for claiming moral damage can be considered the same as the conditions for compensation for material damage, but the criteria and rules for distinguishing the two are completely different. This research is of theoretical type and the research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library and has been done by referring to documents, books and articles.Ethical Considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed. Currently, in almost all the legal systems of the world, the fault of the injured party does not remove the responsibility of the cause of damage and does not cause the complete exclusion of the injured party from receiving damages, but it causes the reduction of the responsibility of the cause of damage, depending on the case. In the legal systems of Iran and England, the possibility of claiming moral damages from legal entities has been recognized. Therefore, in the field of moral damages, it should be acknowledged that in the past, in the Roman law and the old common law system, and accordingly in England, which is influenced by the common law, The fault of the victim or his involvement in the loss caused him to be disqualified from claiming damages.

Psychiatric injury is any harm to the health of individuals that causes their mental illness. The extent of such trauma can range from simple grief to mental disorders. Given that a large number of people are at risk of Psychiatric injury, compensating Psychiatric harm without any criteria will lead to numerous claims and will cause problems for the country's judiciary. Are there any rules in the Iranian and English legal systems that limit compensation of Psychiatric damages? Is that rule effective and can it achieve justice? The British courts have held only "recognized mental illnesses" in psychiatry liable and have not found the rest of the mental harms to be compensable. In Iranian law, despite the fact that some Iranian courts have ruled in favor of compensating for mere emotional distress, but from Article 1 of the Civil Liability code and Article 676 of the Islamic Penal Code the necessity of "mental illness" can be inferred. This article will show that the application of this rule will reduce the number of fraudulent lawsuits in the courts and prevent the huge costs of compensating for mental disorders that are temporary and does not disrupt normal life.

One of the inalienable effects of international responsibility of States is the full reparation of the consequences of wrongdoing. Unlike restitution and compensation, which are mainly used to compensate material damage, satisfaction has been considered as an appropriate method of compensating non-pecuniary damage by State practice, case law and especially the ILC. The study of these procedures shows that satisfaction is generally obtained through processes such as apologizing, declaring the act as a wrongful act, punishing the perpetrators, and so on. On the other hand, financially satisfaction faces serious challenges, but the studies of this article show that it is exceptionally accepted in case of severe and systematic moral damage to non-State entities. The February 9, 2022 judgment of the ICJ in the case of Congo v. Uganda was an opportunity for the Court to resolve the ambiguities of satisfaction. However, as this article will show, this ruling has deepened these doubts, and the Court has reached findings for which no record is available.

The primary solution in Islamic jurisprudence and Iranian law in cases where an individual suffers bodily harm is payment of blood money. The presupposition of the legal literature is that blood money covered all the damages caused to a victim. However, based on this assumption, it is possible that in addition to physical damages, other types of damages may also have been inflicted upon a victim. In other words, in these situations, in principle, economic damages (costs incurred in the prevention, treatment and disability) and moral damages (pain and suffering caused by injury) are imposed on the person, which are different from purely physical injuries in terms of their nature.  Now, there is a question whether the conceptual scope of blood money includes all the aforementioned damages or not.  There is a disagreement in this regard. This difference of opinion has been aggravated, especially considering ambiguity in Article 14 of the Criminal Procedure Act and the lack of clarity of the concept of profits that have a strong probability of being obtained. Nevertheless, while the tendency of the judicial precedent is that blood money does not recover all the damages caused to individual, there is no strong precedent regarding which types of damages in excess of blood money is compensable. Using the analytical-descriptive approach while examining the judgments rendered by courts, this research is of the opinion that blood money is separately paid as a substitute for physical injury and material and moral damages caused to the victim to the extent that it does not lead to double recovery for the same injury, can be compensated.

The society's attention to spiritual harm indicates that society has gone beyond mere appearances and taking care of the spiritual dimension of social life and the development of civility in it. The silence of most of the leading jurisprudents regarding the necessity of compensation for spiritual damage should be considered as a necessity of the time when the society has not, for any reason, felt the need for this type of damage or the necessity of compensation; but now this matter is one of the necessities, and the new jurisprudence and, accordingly, the legal system of the country has responded to this need and has decided to determine its limits and boundaries. Although now there is no doubt about the need to compensate the spiritual loss by itself, neither jurisprudentially nor legally, there are a lot of discussions about the possibility of material compensation through paying money. The Holy Prophet’s practical styles (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the opinions of some jurisprudents in the recent decade, establishing the Note to Article 14 of the Civil Procedure Law enacted in 2013 confirm the possibility of compensation for the said damage through paying money as well. There is still a problem regarding how to determine the amount of money. However, it seems that the judge should pay attention to the conditions of the case and determine the amount of compensation based on it.

In the not-so-distant past, there was a belief that the legal system, unlike physical damages, is not capable of measuring mental suffering or inner anxiety, and therefore such damages cannot be compensated. Courts were reluctant to award compensation in cases that resulted in emotional damage without causing physical damage. At that time, the medical science of psychology could not prove the relationship between creating emotional injuries and the physical causes that lead to them.. For a long time, most people believed that madness and other mental illnesses are caused as a result of a person's sins. In the modern era, such a belief has fundamentally changed and psychological studies have become an inseparable part of medical science. Corresponding to this change in rights, the fact that mental injuries are the same as real physical injuries and can be caused by physical actions has also been gradually accepted. Of course, this does not mean that the rights accept any moral damage and order to compensate it. One of the cases to consider is when a person suffers mental injuries, but this injury is not caused by physical injuries inflicted on him, but as a result of seeing or hearing the news of injuries inflicted on another person, he suffers psychological injuries. The classic example is when a mother witnesses her child being run over by a careless driver. Such a mother is probably psychologically damaged and will not be able to perform her daily tasks properly. Can such a mother file a lawsuit and claim damages due to such mental injuries?

The presupposition of our legal literature is the attribution of moral damages to natural persons, while contrary to what seems apparently,it is also possible to inflict this type of damage on legal persons,especially since the lives of these individuals often depend on the attribution of certain intellectual rights such as reputation and recognition of the possibility of claiming compensation for damage to these rights;Therefore,the silence of the legal literature in this regard must be compensated.This article,with the main focus on corporations,strives to answer the question of whether moral damages can be claimed by a corporation.In answer to this question,we are faced with a range of opinions:some,by emphasizing the virtual existence of companies, give a negative answer to this question,and others,believing in their real existence,give a positive answer.This article takes the view of the separation of moral damages and does not consider the moral damages that are to support emotions to belong to commercial companies, but according to the nature of the commercial company,it accepts the possibility of claiming damages on the companychr('39')s intellectual capital.In this article,the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as well as the British law are reviewed and finally,Iranian law will be examined.

In the recent past, it was believed that the legal system, unlike physical damages, could not measure mental suffering or internal anxiety, and therefore such damages could not be compensated. Courts were reluctant to issue compensation in cases that resulted in emotional harm without causing physical harm. In modern times, this belief has changed fundamentally, and psychological damage is the same as real physical damage and can be caused by physical actions. Of course, this does not mean that the law accepts any moral damages and orders compensation. The present study was conducted by descriptive-analytical method.Findings and One of the cases to consider is when a person suffers from psychological injuries, but this injury is not due to physical injuries, but as a result of seeing or hearing the news of injuries to another person suffers psychological damage. The material presented in this article concludes that in fact a person who suffers from abnormal sad reactions due to the loss of a loved one is entitled to compensation from the reader whose carelessness was the direct cause of such complications.

Civil liability for damage from nervous shock is one of the most challenging issues in the legal system due to the fear of self-physical harm or the observation of an accident and harm to close relatives. In legal systems, personal compensation resulting from physical damage to nervous shock has been almost recognaized. But compensation for a person who is only at the risk of physical damage and suffering from a nervous shock (Primary Victim) is place of reflection. Civil liability for people who witnessed an accident or injury to relatives and suffered from nervous shock (Secondary Victim) is not explicitly recognized. In the civil liability of English Law, Nervous Shock damages to Primary and  Secondary Victims offset by constraints and conditions, and is accepted in judicial precedent. In the Iranian legal system, the design of such claims is not common, and in addition to the law of Islamic punishment, adopted in 1392, which recognized the mental disorder as having arisen, there was no explicit law in the past. However, according to the principles governing compensation, including the principle of dismissal, and the article one of a Civil Liability law, compensation for the damage caused by the shock caused by the moral damage is acceptable. In other words, the findings of this article show that there is no difference in the need to compensate for the damage caused by nervous shock in Iranian and English law.

The subject of this article is the analysis of two judgments in the field of claiming moral damages.
The subject of these two judgments is that the obligor did not fulfill his obligation to film a wedding ceremony and did not deliver the wedding videos. The obligee has also filed a lawsuit and demanded compensation for the damages incurred by her.
Naturally, one of the examples of damages is the moral damage that has been inflicted on the obligee due to not having a lasting visual record of the wedding ceremony.
Now, it remains to be seen under what circumstances this type of damage can be claimed in the Iranian legal system.
In this article, considering the fact that moral damages sought are directly caused by the obligor and are basically predictable, the ability to claim such damages is emphasized.
Another issue is the method of compensation. In these two judgments, two methods have been used to compensate for the moral damage: one, the obligation to "pay the equivalent of the salary received" and the other, the obligation to "pay the equivalent of the costs of the wedding ceremony."
In this article, emphasizing the fact that the judge should think in a way that is compatible with the "circumstances of the case", an attempt is made to examine the appropriateness of the abovementioned methods.

In this article, the criterion for assessing corporal injury has been comparatively examined in Islamic, Irania1n, French and English law. The fundamental question is, for the evaluation of corporal injury, should a fixed assessment system or a case by case system be adopted, and which one is more efficient and better serves the purpose of civil liability? By a descriptive-analytical research method and by studying in different legal systems, it was concluded that in French and English law, a case evaluation system is used to evaluate corporal injuries and Islamic and Iranian law has accepted a fixed evaluation system to evaluate such injuries. However, the study of the types of compensable damages in corporal injuries and legal analysis of the issue shows that in this context we should differentiate between "corporal injury specifically" (loss of life or limb or senses), and "financial and non-financial losses arising out of corporal injuries (material and moral damages caused by corporal injury). In regard to the first type, a fixed evaluation system and concerning the second type, the case evaluation system for the evaluation of corporal injuries should be accepted.

Child marriage has long been one of the most controversial topics in various sciences, including jurisprudence and law, and this phenomenon has been encountered differently in accordance with customs and traditions in different societies and time periods, Regardless of the subject matter, whether it is permissible or not, whether it is criminalized or not, child marriage means the marriage of minor children. This phenomenon can cause moral damage to the child. The origins of this damage may be from the guardian or the spouse. This research has been done by a descriptive-analytical method through studying jurisprudential and legal texts with the aim of identifying the origins of moral damage caused by child marriage. The findings of the study indicate that "non-observance of the child's interests by the guardian", "general enjoyment of the child", "special enjoyment of the child and deprivation of virginity by the spouse" and sometimes "the principle of child marriage" are the most important origins of moral damage caused by child marriage. During the research, these origins and how they cause damage has been studied from a jurisprudential and legal perspective.

It is doubtless that murder is normally committed by an act. In the Iranian criminal law literature, criminal act with regard to murder has been divided into physical and non-physical act without precise definition and determination of criteria of these two acts. As a consequence, they are not clearly distinguished from each other. Hence, there are some criminal conducts that do not fall within these divisions. The reason is the considering hitting or non-hitting on victim's body and the type of injury as a measure of the distinction of these two acts. In the present essay, after defining and distinguishing the physical and non-physical acts, attempt has been made to classify the acts into physical and non-physical on the basis of the nature of the committed act, regardless of the result. In addition, hitting or non-hitting of the act on victim's body and physical and moral damage has been taken into account only in classifying the physical act.

Although "moral damage" is one of the challenging issues necessarily stipulated in present principles, laws and regulations but it is not determined how to compensate and evaluate. Some strategies are considered for moral damage compensation in legal systems of different countries, but there isn't any definite criterion for the methods of moral damage compensation. The writer believes that the capability of moral damage compensation and how to compensate it could be justified and inferred in relation to the law principles in Iran and Islam: the rule of "no-damage" as a jurisprudent certainty is invoked in order to prove the civil liability arising from moral damage and the methods of compensation. In addition to the rule of "no-damage", the other reason is anticipation of blood money about physical hurts which lead to moral damage. The intelligentsia also judge to compensate the moral damage imposed on humans. The moral damage is also compensated in legal law in Iran. There isn’t any definite method to compensate the moral damages but it deems that the common methods in statue, common law and jurisprudence are acceptable because the methods of moral damage compensation are relative and resultant which are derived from legal and social thoughts in every time and then consent and religious law could be understood from the silence and lack of legislator prevention.Therefore, we can say that the acceptance of financial compensation and sorts of non- financial compensation is justifiable and defensible for reparation of moral damage in Islamic jurisprudence