‌Context & Objective: The formation of a marital relationship entails not only legal obligations—such as the duty of fidelity—but also deep emotional and psychological connections between spouses. An extramarital affair by one party, therefore, represents not only a violation of this legal duty but also a source of emotional distress for the other spouse, potentially giving rise to civil liability. This article aims to explore the possibility and legal basis for compensating such non-material harm, focusing specifically on a comparative analysis of Iranian law and the common law system. The central research question is whether and how legal systems recognize and address claims for damages arising from extramarital affairs within the framework of marital life.
 ‌Method & Approach: This study employs a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology. It systematically analyzes primary and secondary legal sources in both Iranian and common law contexts to identify the principles, mechanisms, and limitations related to civil liability for emotional harm caused by infidelity. By comparing these two legal traditions, the article seeks to uncover convergences and divergences in the treatment of such claims and the rationale behind each system’s approach.
 ‌Findings: The research reveals that civil liability for damages caused by extramarital affairs depends on the existence of a valid marital bond and the occurrence of the extramarital act. A criminal conviction of the offending spouse is not necessary to establish liability; however, a criminal acquittal based on insufficient evidence of the affair negates the possibility of civil compensation. The damages typically pertain to non-pecuniary (moral) harm, and their assessment involves several factors: the emotional impact on the injured spouse, the level of emotional attachment they had toward the unfaithful partner, their own performance of marital duties, societal and cultural norms, and their personal and social standing.
 ‌Conclusion: The comparative analysis indicates that while both Iranian law and the common law system recognize the potential for civil liability in the context of extramarital affairs, they approach it from different doctrinal and procedural angles. Nevertheless, both systems emphasize the seriousness of the emotional harm inflicted on the injured spouse and allow for compensation based on moral and contextual criteria. The study underscores the evolving recognition of emotional injury within marital relationships as a legitimate ground for civil remedy.