A Comparative Study of Assumption of Risk in British Law and the Rule of Emprise in Jurisprudence and Iranian Law

Document Type : Scientific Research

Authors

1 Shahid Motahhari University Associate Professor (Corresponding Author)

2 Ph.D. Student in Jurisprudence and Private Law, Shahid Motahhari University

Abstract


Responsibility and liability has been created in jurisprudence in respect of private ownership and individual’s property. If anyone breaks the respect of his life and property, liability also is nullified. Rule of emprise in jurisprudence is an evidence of this issue. This rule is similar to the assumption of risk in English law. It means that whenever a person, with knowledge of risk, puts himself in dangerous situation, and this causes damage to him, he has no right for compensation. It is therefore necessary that these two rules be carefully examined and conditions, scope and manifestations of them be clarified, as well as their similarities and differences.

Keywords

References

Black, H., Nolan, J. & Haley, J. (1990). Black’s law dictionary: definitions of the terms and phrases of American and English jurisprudence, ancient and modern by Henry Campbell Black. 6th ed. St. Paul, MN: West.
Cavendis - Routledge. (2002). Tort law cards, 3rd edition. London: Cavendish publishing.
Elliott, C. & Quinn, F. (2011). Tort law. Harlow, Essex, England New York: Pearson Longman.
Harpwood, V. (2000). Principles of tort law. London: Cavendish.
Harpwood, V. (2009). Modern tort law. London New York: Routledge-Cavendish.
Prosser, W. L., (1978). Law of Torts (4th ed). St. Paul, MN: West
Stephenson, G. (2000). Sourcebook on torts. London: Cavendish.
Stuhmcke, A. (2001). Essential tort law. Sydney, N.S.W. London: Cavendish.
Civil Law Knowledge
Volume 6, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
September 2017
Pages 61-70

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics