نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
Fault is one of the fundamental concepts in the law of civil liability and has traditionally been regarded as the primary basis for attributing liability in private law. Nevertheless, examining this concept solely within the framework of legal rules is insufficient; a proper understanding of fault also requires attention to the philosophical foundations of liability and moral blameworthiness. In law, fault generally refers to conduct that is inconsistent with the standard of reasonable behavior in society and that consequently causes harm to another person. The fundamental question, however, is why such conduct should give rise to liability and what philosophical basis underlies such an attribution. Adopting an analytical approach, the present study examines the concept of fault in light of several major theories in the philosophy of law. Within this framework, the relationship between fault and concepts such as human agency, moral responsibility, and justice is considered. On the one hand, corrective justice, rooted in the thought of Aristotle, regards fault as a basis for remedying the imbalance created between the injured party and the person who caused the harm. On the other hand, certain utilitarian perspectives regard fault as a means of preventing harmful conduct and promoting social efficiency. Furthermore, the expansion of cases of strict liability in contemporary law demonstrates that reliance solely on fault as the basis of liability has not been without challenges. Overall, a philosophical examination of fault indicates that the concept is closely connected with ethical debates and theories of justice, and that its analysis can provide a clearer understanding of the place of fault in civil liability.
کلیدواژهها English
