ENGLISH-UNDERSTANDING TORT THROUGH TWO TRADITIONS: THE COMMON LAW AND ISLAMIC LAW PERSPECTIVES

Hafiz Ghulam Abbas; Javed Hussain Bhayo; Muhammad Junaid Ilyas

Hafiz Ghulam Abbas Associate Professor, School of Law, Bahria University, Islamabad, Pakistan https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4257-1891
Javed Hussain Bhayo Lecturer, Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto School of Law, Shah Abdul Latif University, Khairpur Mirs, Pakistan https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5742-6475
Muhammad Junaid Ilyas Lecture Department of Law, University of Chakwal, Chakwal, Pakistan https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0553-7563

Keywords: Tort, Islamic law, Common law, Harm, Civil liability

Abstract

One of the most vibrant and ethically complex areas of legal theory is tort law, which serves as a remedy for civil wrongs. Islamic law (Shari‘ah) conceptualizes civil liability through the principles of harm (ḍarar), wrongful conduct (taʿaddī), and restitution (taʿwīḍ), which are intricately entwined with moral accountability and divine justice, whereas the common law tradition has developed a sophisticated system based on fault, duty of care, and compensatory justice. It examines the differences between the Islamic system's incorporation of the moral, social, and spiritual aspects of wrongdoing and the common law's secular, precedent-based reasoning. The study points out both similarities and differences, especially with regard to the origins of law, the extent of moral responsibility, and the significance of purpose. It concludes that comparing and contrasting common and Islamic legal concepts enhances theoretical knowledge and advances the growing conversation about harmonizing legal systems in multicultural countries. It follows a comparative method to discuss the idea of tort in these two legal traditions, with doctrinal research methods, and qualitative conduct of the research, which looks at the doctrinal frameworks, philosophical underpinnings, and responsibility goals of each.