Abstract
This study examines the criterion of "foreseeability of loss" in the field of civil liability with a comparative approach between Islamic jurisprudence, Iranian law and Egyptian law. In Islamic jurisprudence, especially in the discussion of loss, there is no explicit statement on the condition of predictability in compensation for damage, and the rule "Whoever damages another's property, he has a guarantor" implies the general inclusion of the guarantee. There is also no explicit text on this condition in Iranian law, and three views have been put forward among jurists: a group believes in the condition of predictability, a group denies it, and another group believes in the distinction between contractual and compulsory liability. A comparative study with Egyptian law shows that the view of distinguishing between two types of liability prevails in the legal regulations, legal doctrine and judicial practice of that country. However, the findings of this study, which were compiled using an analytical-descriptive method, indicate the superiority of the view of "the unpredictability of losses". Since the parties usually do not pay attention to all the results and consequences of the contract when concluding it, including the responsibilities arising from the breach of obligation, the source of contractual liability should be considered the law and not the mere will of the parties. It is the legislator who explains, interprets and validates the effects and consequences of the contract, and rules such as "no harm", "attribution" and "respect for certain rights" require that all damages, both foreseeable and unpredictable, be compensated. As a result, the theory of unconditionality, in addition to achieving contractual and economic justice, strengthens public trust, prevents possible abuses in transactional relations and maintains a balance in the distribution of wealth. This approach, ultimately, is in complete harmony with the objectives of Sharia and the goals of the science of law, which are to maintain order, legal security and social justice.