Document Type : Research Article
Authors
1
Phd student of private law in faculty of law of tarbiat modares university, Tehran, Iran.
2
Assosiate professor of faculty of law of tarbiat modares university, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Joint tortship in its general sense is the intervention of more than one person
in committing tort. In this sense, the jointness acompanicity and participates
in it. The jointness, in a special sense, is limited to interfere more than two
persons in the commission of the operation and the material element of the
tort. In the US legal system, in addition to cases where two or more people
really commit actus reus of tort, there are instances where with use of titles
such as "attribaution", commition of actus reus is attributed to more than one
person, Virtually. In this legal system, this is based on goals such as redress
and deterrence. In Iranian law, according to the well-known Opinion, the
jointness in tort, is subject to the commission of actus reus by two or more
persons and apparently in some cases, like the American law, with implicit
using of the title "attribution", realization of jointness in tort is ruled that
does not look right. Because, contrary to the US law and some veiws in
popular jurisprudence, when the legislator in the latter part of Article 535 of
the Islamic Penal Code of 2013 considers intent to have an impact on the
material reality of the jointness, he does not abide by all its effects and
assumption. In the case of criminal responsibility, it imposes the less
punishment on the accomplice and in the case of civil liability, he assumes
the distribution of damages on multiple causes. In the present study, it has
been proved by a descriptive-analytical method that, unlike the US law
which because of its instrumentalist nature, jointness in wrongs has wide
scope, in Iranian law, because of its ethical basis, jointness in wrongs, has
narrow scope and Accordingly, it is proposed to amend or delete the last part
of Article 535 of the Islamic Penal Code of 2013
Keywords
)
