Comparative Analysis of the Recoverability and Quantum of Disability Damages in the Legal Systems of Iran and England
Keywords:
damage, disability, rights, Iran, EnglandAbstract
Following incidents such as traffic accidents or work-related events, individuals may suffer harm. The damages incurred generally encompass both pecuniary (material) and non-pecuniary (moral) aspects. The recoverability and scope of disability damages are complex issues, and different legal systems have established various rules in this regard. The primary objective of this study is a “comparative analysis of the recoverability and quantum of disability damages in the legal systems of Iran and England.” In terms of purpose, the research is applied; in terms of nature and method, it is descriptive–analytical; and in terms of content, it is qualitative. Given that data were collected from valid scholarly journals, documents, and scientific studies, the research is of a documentary–library type. The findings indicate that the explicit recognition of compensation for disability damages in statutory law strengthens the view that a broad range of pecuniary and non-pecuniary rights is acknowledged within various legal provisions of the Iranian legal system. Unlike the English legal system, Iranian law tends to accept compensation for all forms of damage. The Iranian legal system, influenced by legislative provisions and shaped by customary and religious perspectives, reflects these principles within the structure of laws applied by courts. In contrast, the English legal system, grounded in a more subjective and psychological approach, seeks to compensate disability damages primarily through judicial decisions and doctrinal developments, supplemented by certain statutes, including insurance laws. Based on the findings, the research hypothesis—namely, the existence of differences in the legal implementation of disability damage claims between the legal systems of Iran and England—is confirmed, and the null hypothesis is rejected.
Downloads
References
1. Banks J, Blundell R, Bozio A, Emmerson C. Releasing Jobs for the Young? Early Retirement and Youth Unemployment in the United Kingdom. In: Wise DA, Gruber J, editors. Social Security Programs and Retirement around the world: The relationship to youth employment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2011. p. 325-9.
2. Babaei I. Compensation for bodily injuries in the civil liability law of Iran. Quarterly Journal of Law and Politics. 2019;12:36.
3. Khadem Sarbakhsh M, Soltani Nejad H. The principle of compensability of all damages, jurisprudential foundations of Islamic law. Jurisprudential Foundations of Islamic Law. 2013;6(12):64.
4. Ruff A. Rules of English contract law from the perspective of judicial precedent. Mousavi M, editor. Tehran: Mizan Publishing; 2015. 32 p.
5. Amini E, Noei E. General rules of civil liability in English law with a glance at Iranian law. Scientific Quarterly of Comparative Law Research of Iran and International. 2012;5(16):51.
6. Khadem Razavi G, Noei E. A comparative study of the foundations of fault-based and strict liability in the civil liability law of Iran and England. Govah Legal Teachings. 2015(1):102.
7. Lamond G. What is a crime? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 2007;27(4):612.
8. Taheri Nasab Y. Causal relationship in the criminal law of Iran and England. Tehran: Justice Publications; 2009. 390 p.
9. Barikloo A. Civil liability. Tehran: Mizan Publishing; 2020. 100 p.
10. Katouzian N. Extra-contractual obligations, civil liability: Special and mixed liabilities. Tehran: Mizan Publishing; 2012. 61-101 p.
11. Saadat Mostafavi M, Paykari MJ. A new approach to the foundations of civil liability in Iranian law and Imami jurisprudence. Govah Legal Teachings Journal. 2017(1):173.
12. Bahrami Ahmadi H. Compulsory guarantee, civil liability. Tehran: Imam Sadiq University Press; 2016. 124 p.
13. Hosseini Nejad H. Civil liability. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press; 2014. 58-89 p.
14. Rezaei Rad A. The scope of effectiveness of the jurisprudential rule of La Zarar. Specialized Quarterly of Islamic Law. 2010(25):56.
15. Mohammadi P, Moradpourshad A, Mobin H. The impact of the Criminal Procedure Code adopted in 2013 on the possibility of claiming moral damages and loss of profit in the Iranian legal system. Quarterly Journal of Private Law Research. 2018:77-80.
16. Ghaffari M. Compensation for disability and other expenses using the La Zarar rule. National Conference on Modern and Creative Ideas in Management, Accounting, Legal and Social Studies; Urmia2018. p. 187.
17. Mousavi Bojnourdi M. Jurisprudential rules. Tehran: Majd Publications; 2017. 193 p.
18. Badini H, Momeni K. A new approach to prove the application of the La Zarar rule in negative judgments in the field of civil liability. Quarterly Journal of Law, Journal of the Faculty of Law and Political Science. 2013:29.
19. Izanloo M, Badini H, Nahrini F, Mahmoudi Moghaddam M. An approach to the amount of compensation for bodily injury with a comparative study approach in Islamic, Iranian, French and English law. Comparative Research Quarterly of Islamic and Western Law. 2021;6:49.
20. Sadeghi MH. Crimes against persons (Special Criminal Law 1). Tehran: Mizan Publishing; 2020. 65-7 p.
21. Ghorbani M, Shadmanfar MR, Ghoddousi A. Investigating the method of determining Diya in casualties leading to vegetative life from the perspective of judges and forensic doctors. Scientific Journal of Forensic Medicine. 2012;18:110.
22. Badini H. The purpose of civil liability. Journal of the Faculty of Law and Political Science. 2004:22-6.
23. David R, Jauffret-Spinosi C. Major Legal Systems in the World Today: An Introduction to the Comparative Study of Law. Safaei H, editor. Tehran: Mizan Publishing; 2012. 147-9 p.
24. Alipanah A. A comparative study of Diya and punitive damages in Imami jurisprudence and the Common Law legal system. Journal of Islamic Law Research. 2008;9(27):41-5.
25. Hosseini Modarres M, Golshani E. Compensatory methods for payment of damages for breach of contractual obligations in English law and its proposal in Iranian law. Quarterly Journal of Civil Law Knowledge. 2013:28.
26. Darabpour M. General principles of civil liability in the English legal system. Legal Perspective Quarterly, Faculty of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services. 2009:88.
27. King D, Mossialos E. The Determinants of Private Medical Insurance Prevalence in England, 1997-2000. Health Services Research. 2005;40(1):189.
28. Khaji G. The rule of precedent in English law and Common Law. Tehran: Sokhan Gostar Publishing; 2018. 24 p.
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Mohammad Rahim Akrami Moghaddam, Firooz Ahmadi, Seyed Ebrahim Mousavi, Jamshid Mirzaei (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
