An Investigation into the Nature and Basis of Contractual Liability; A Comparative Study of Islamic and Western Law

Abstract

Contractual liability in the strict sense of the word is the obligation to compensate for damages arised from breach of contract. The main question is about the nature and basis of this obligation. Shall we consider it as a form of compliance of the contract; meaning that promisor has to give the equivalent of the contract to aggrieved party and perform the contract indirectly; or shall it be considered a separate nature of the contract and as a compensation which is imposed by the law? In the past, western legal systems; specially in France, contended that the claim to compensate for damages is an alternative to the contractual obligation and presumed specific performance. But this view changed, so today, contractual liability like non-contractual liability is considered as a compensatory function, and its basis is considered to be in breach of the contractual obligation so it is separated from the main obligation of the contract. This different view leads to different effects; particularly it denies the the distinction between contractual and non-contractual liability and causes the unification of civil liability. This view corresponds to Islamic law rudiments. It seems that in the Iranian legal system- emanating from Islamic Law, both contractual and non-contractual liability have a same nature and subsequently there is no duality in civil liability. In the present study, we have tried to examine this issue in the Islamic and French law. An interpretion of Article 221 of Civil Code concludes our perspective on Iranian law.

Keywords

• breach of contract
• contractual liability
• unity of contractual and non-contractual fault
• article 221 of civil code