Analysis of the Economic Effects of Civil Liability Arising from the Acts of Others: A Comparative Study of Iranian and Iraqi Law

Abstract

The concept of civil liability, meaning the obligation to compensate for damages, has evolved over time from simple personal relationships into a subject with broad economic and social dimensions. One of its most complex manifestations is liability arising from the acts of others, where a person is held accountable for the harmful conduct of another. This form of liability, which transcends the principle of personal accountability, appears in cases such as the liability of guardians, employers, and the state. The rules governing this liability, grounded in theories such as fault and risk, directly influence the distribution of financial risks within society and the protection of injured parties. The objective of this descriptive–analytical study is to compare the approaches of Iran and Iraq in this area and to examine the differing economic implications of Iran’s contradictory and fragmented legal provisions versus Iraq’s more complex yet functionally effective legal solutions. The findings reveal a fundamental divergence between the two systems regarding liability for the acts of others. Iran’s scattered laws have produced a dual system that ambiguously shifts the burden of loss between the incapacitated person and the guardian, often neglecting the rights of the injured party. In contrast, Iraq, by adopting the risk theory and imposing strict parental liability, distributes risk more equitably. This fundamental difference in risk allocation and compensation efficiency highlights the weaker performance of Iran’s legal system.