ضوابط الالتزام الطبيعي في نظام المعاملات المدنية السعودي: "دراسة تحليلية مقارنة"

Abstract EN

This article studied the controls of natural obligation in the Saudi system in a comparative analytical study, where a comparison was made between the civil transactions system, the Egyptian Civil Law, and the Libyan Civil Law.

This topic is critical because it represents the moral and religious aspect of the obligation when the element of responsibility is not available.

For example, the creditor cannot demand justice from the debtor, except that the debtor, with moral and religious motives, believes that he owes a debt that he must fulfill.

Thus, we presented the nature of the natural obligation, its development, its forms and conditions, and the effects that result from it, whether related to the availability of the indebtedness element or the failure of the liability element.

Finally, we discuss the answer to the main question: What is the plan followed by the Saudi regulator in regulating the religious-based commitment (natural obligation), and is this plan compatible with what the Egyptian and Libyan civil law has adopted? We have concluded that the Saudi regulator has regulated the natural obligation, but under the name of “religious-based commitment” and narrowed its cases by restricting it to one case, which is the case of a civil obligation that is impossible to implement, as it results in a religious-based commitment.

Moreover, in contrast to Egyptian and Libyan law, the Saudi regulator did not give the judiciary Discretionary authority in assessing the existence of a natural obligation other than this case.

This difference is due to the Saudi regime being influenced by Islamic jurisprudence and the Kuwait Document for the Unified Civil System for the Arab Gulf Cooperation Council countries, in contrast to the Egyptian and Libyan civil law, which was influenced by the Roman and French law and jurisprudence.