Investigating the Conflicts of Bone Fracture Rules

Author(s): Adele Sarikhani, Seyed Abbase Hoseiniye Heshmatiyan

Institution: University of Qom, Iran

Category: Article, IJMMU, Health, Law

Topics: Crimes Against Persons; Rule of Bone Fracture Payment; Conflict of Rules; Payment of Members

Abstract: Abstract The Islamic Penal Code, based on Imamiyyah jurisprudence, has included two rules of the rules for the payment of the bones; One is the rule that states the rule of breaking the bone of a member, and the other rule that states the rule of crushing the bone of a member has a fixed amount, by using them, a big step can be taken in the direction of facilitating the laws related to the issue of the amount, but the legislator for many reasons such as ambiguity In the case of fracture and numerous conflicts in the rules of bone fracture, it has not been able to take full advantage of all the rules of the diet and has turned to case orientation instead of the rules of the diet, and this has caused the accumulation of a large amount of legal materials of the diet. In order to assist the legislator in solving these limitations and conflicts, he helped to provide solutions and reduce the case orientation of the laws. Some of what was stated as a rule or theory about bone injuries are not eligible for the title of rule or theory, because sometimes there is no corresponding case for them, and in some cases, the allocation of the majority occurs, which is an ugly thing among most jurists. As a result, it is necessary to specifically state the ruling on compensation for each of the injuries in each of the bones, and refrain from stating the rules for which there is no documentation.

Article can be downloaded >> Investigating the Conflicts of Bone Fracture Rules