الاتجاه نحو تقييم جديد للمسؤولية الناشئة عن حراسة الأشياء التي تتطلب عناية خاصة : دراسة تحليلية في ضوء قانون المعاملات المدنية الاتحادي 1985 م

الملخص EN

The study turned spotlight on the two theories of error and harm as basis of the liability of a guard, but they both proved futile in this regard.

Hence, it was concluded that a state should compensate persons who suffered detriment as a result of crime in general or as a result of any prejudice whose party at fault is unidentified or in the event of insolvency.

The compensation can be through a dedicated fines fund; this might be a fair solution than presuming fault on the party causing the harm who might be innocent.

The same applies in the event of failure to prove negligence of a party.

Study also argued that Ministry of Economy should impose fees on profitable companies to be utilized in compensating persons who suffered detriment which is hard to prove.

Study also recommended forcing both private and public institutions to insure guarding of different items.

It also argued that presumed fault and legal presumption which is hard to prove deviate from justice which calls the need to show due consideration for the prejudiced party in cases of absence of compulsory insurance.

By so doing, we observe the philosophy of law which is based on error theory.