Nervous Shock: Is it Available in The Islamic Law of Tort?

Author(s):  
Abdul Basir bin Mohamad

AbstractAs we know from the discussions amongst Muslim jurists in their writings, they normally highlight the law of qisas and diya as well as ta‘zir for dealing with cases of death and injury resulting from physical tort such as beating, punching, whipping, kicking, slashing, stabbing, snapping, etc. But a question may arise as to death or injury resulting from non‐physical or immaterial torts or, in current legal terminology, nervous shock. Could the case be settled by Islamic law? Nervous shock can also cause mental illness, mental retardation, morbid depression, mental shock, or, in modern terms, psychiatric damage or psychiatric illness, and in that way can also cause someone to suffer a physical injury or death. To resolve this, we have to refer to kinds of law as a yardstick to measure the tortuous liability. It surely falls under human law, even though it is combined with divine law, but human law prevails here. The Muslim jurists have exemplified this law by relating it to qisas and diya in the case of punishment for murder, injury, and wounding. As such, the cases of nervous shock are certainly included in the discussion of qisas and diya in general. In the first part of this paper the discussion on nervous shock focuses on the English law of tort and is then followed by the exploration in Islamic law of tort. As we know, the rule of nervous shock has been practiced and applied intensively in English law over a long period of time, and at the same time the discussion clearly shows that the rule of nervous shock appears in Islam and is not alien to the Islamic law of tort.

Obiter ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Razaana Denson

The article discusses and compares the dissolution of a marriage as well as the legal consequences thereof in Islamic law, South African law and English law. This is done in order to demonstrate that despite similarities, there are vast differences between the three legal systems. This impacts on how Muslim personal law (MPL) can be recognised and regulated in South Africa and in England and Wales as constitutional democracies. South Africa, England and Wales share a commitment to human rights and have adopted various approaches in respect of accommodating the application of Islamic law. Internal pluralism also exists within the Muslim communities in South Africa, England and Wales as the majority of Muslims in these countries have to varying degrees developed diverse strategies to ensure compliance with Islamic law, as well as with South African and English law. Notwithstanding the accommodation of MPL in terms of South African and English law, the differences between these legal systems have resulted in decisions that, while providing relief to the lived realities of Muslims, are in fact contrary to the teachings and principles of Islam and therefore problematic for Muslims.


1998 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Teff

The devastating impact that psychiatric illness can have on people's lives is beyond dispute. It would be absurd to contend that such harm is somehow intrinsically less serious than physical injury; indeed, over many years, medical research has pointed to the artificiality of characterising it as lacking physical manifestations. Its destructive potential is brought into sharper focus as mental attributes become ever more integral to everyday functioning. Yet, to this day, neither popular nor judicial opinion is noticeably receptive to a cause of action based on proof of a “recognised psychiatric disorder”, which is still often trivialised by the label “nervous shock”. This negative attitude is most apparent when claimants are not, or are not regarded as, the direct victims of someone else's conduct. The very notion of compensating people whose suffering derives from their reaction to the injuring of others often evokes surprise, indignation and disdain.


Obiter ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 704-750
Author(s):  
Razaana Denson

The primary concern of this article is a comparative analysis of marriage law in three legal systems – namely, Islamic law, South African law and English law. The similarities and differences between these legal systems are highlighted. The comparative analysis demonstrates that although there are similarities in the three legal systems, the differences outweigh the similarities. This begs the question whether Islamic law (Muslim personal law in general and family law in particular) can be recognised and accommodated and implemented in the South African and English legal systems (both constitutional democracies) without compromising the principles of Islamic law, while at the same time upholding the rights contained in the Bill of Rights. To this end, a comparative analysis is undertaken of the law of marriage that entails a discussion, inter alia, of betrothal (engagement), the legal requirements for a marriage, as well as the personal and proprietary consequences of a marriage as applicable in Islamic law, South African law and English law.


2021 ◽  
pp. 102-137
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley

This chapter begins by explaining the meaning of psychiatric harm. It then discusses the general exclusionary rule; the distinction between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ victims; and other circumstances where the law recognises victims of psychiatric harms as having a claim in negligence (rescuers, involuntary participants, communicators of shocking news, self-harm by the defendant and ‘assumption of responsibility’ cases). Though initially psychiatric harm was recoverable only if accompanied by physical injury, it is now clear that the claimant can recover for pure psychiatric harm so long as it is a recognised psychiatric illness. It is not, therefore, possible to recover in the tort of negligence for mere grief, anxiety or distress.


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Al Ikhlas Al Ikhlas ◽  
Desi Yusdian ◽  
Alfurqan Alfurqan ◽  
Murniyetti Murniyetti ◽  
Nurjanah Nurjanah
Keyword(s):  
The Law ◽  

As written in Al-Muwâfaqât Fi Ushûli Al-Syari'ah, Imâm Al-Shatibi explained that every divine law (the command of Allah) must be prescribed on purposes and objectives. The desired objective of law is to fulfill for the benefit of humankind. Imâm Al-Shatibi divided the higher objectives of law into two categories: (1) the objectives of the Lawgiver (Allah as the Lawgiver), and (2) the human objectives (the benefits that refer to human as the doer of Law). The human objectives are defined in three scales: from the ‘essential’ (dharûriyat), to the ‘necessary’ (hajiyât), and to the ‘complementary’ (tahsiniyât). Furthermore, Imam Al-Shatibi explained that there are four steps in understanding the human objectives. The first is understanding maqasid (the objectives) through the purity of the command and prohibitions. Second,it is understanding maqasid through the existence of ‘illah (basis) contained in commands and prohibitions. And the third, understanding the maqasid through the law that related to 'adah (habit) and 'ibadah (worship) which have the main and additional objectives. Fourth, understand the maqasid through silence due to the absence of any occasions or circumstances for further declaration related to the certain matter. In other word, for certain issue, there is no evidence from the Holy book that provides the reasons of the law implementation even though there is a meaning (ma’na) behind the revelation.


2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (S1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
P. Mohr ◽  
I. Tuma

The Czech law related to compulsory hospitalization dates back to 1966, but it has been revised several times. Besides having mental illness as a criterion for compulsory admission, the law requires the criterion that the patient may only be committed to the hospital, if he is an acute danger to himself and/or others. The Czech law does not accept the criterion that patient may be committed, if there is a danger to his health or if his behavior is not accepted to the community. The law does not specify the type of psychiatric illness required for a person to be committed. A patient admitted voluntarily to a psychiatric ward can be subsequently detained if he fulfilled the criteria of the law. The psychiatrist must examine the patient, decide and apply for commitment. The court has to be notified of compulsory admission in period of 24 hours. The detention is decided by judge in seven days. The detention could last up to 3 months then should be reevaluated by court. Appeals or complaints regarding compulsory acts are referred to the court by guardian or patient himself. A competence proceeding and the appointment of a guardian is considered in the case of demented, retarded, and in some cases of psychotic people. At issue is whether such people are capable of managing their own affairs, to make sound judgment-to weigh, to reason, and to make reasonable decision. Incompetence is decided by judge. Expert psychiatric witnesses play a role in determining the level of incompetence. The court appoints a guardian.


Tort Law ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 102-136
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley

This chapter begins by explaining the meaning of psychiatric harm. It then discusses the general exclusionary rule; the distinction between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ victims; and other circumstances where the law recognises victims of psychiatric harms as having a claim in negligence (rescuers, involuntary participants, communicators of shocking news, self-harm by the defendant and ‘assumption of responsibility’ cases). Though initially psychiatric harm was recoverable only if accompanied by physical injury, it is now clear that the claimant can recover for pure psychiatric harm so long as it is a recognised psychiatric illness. It is not, therefore, possible to recover in the tort of negligence for mere grief, anxiety or distress.


1983 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 565-565
Author(s):  
William T. McReynolds
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document