عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No. (260): "Liability in Run-Over Accidents"

Date Added : 18-07-2018

Resolution No. (260) (13/2018) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Liability in Run-Over Accidents"

Date: (8/Ramadan/1439 AH), corresponding to (24/5/2018).

 

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

 

During its eighth session held on the above date, the Board reviewed the question sent by one of the citizens and it read as follows:

 

Should the driver, who is observing lane discipline and moving within the assigned speed limit, be held liable for running over a child who popped up from between cars or from the sidewalk?

 

After deliberating, the Board decided the following:

 

Islamic jurisprudence has addressed the issue of liability in traffic accidents with a spectrum of generally agreed upon rules. One of these is that when initiation and cause of damage are combined, the person causing the accident shouldn`t be held liable unless there is misconduct/transgression on his/her part. "The initiator should bear liability in case he/she has or hasn`t transgressed." {Al-Enayah Shareh Al-Hidayah, vol.10/pp.325}. Moreover, "The initiator is liable even if he/she hasn`t transgressed while the person causing the accident isn`t unless he/she has transgressed." {Maj`ma` Ad-Damanat, 146}.

 

In principle, rulings on traffic accidents depend on the traffic sketch issued by the appropriate departments based on what has actually happened, and so this report determinesliability or non-liability and its percentage.

 

As for accidents in which the driver is free from liability: abided by traffic regulations, speed limit and paid attention to the road, the situation of the person who has been run over is checked in terms of being negligent or not. Based on this, there are two case scenarios:

 

Either the driver or the victim initiated the collision. If the initiation was accompanied by some kind of negligence on the part of the driver then the latter should be held liable.

 

However, if the driver hasn`t committed any act of negligence or violation that could make him bear part of the liability, there was no chance that he could avoid the accident, and the victim (Person run over) was fully negligent, then the formeris neither held liable nor pays an expiation, as determined by the Sharia maxim: "Permissibility eliminates liability." Resolution (71/1993) by the International Islamic Fiqh Academy stated: "Car accidents undergo the rulings of criminology stipulated in Sharia……freedom from liability is granted only in the following situations: (One of them): The accident was due to the victim`s negligence and transgression, so it is his/her liability."

In conclusion, liability in run-over accidents should be borne by the negligent party. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

 

The Iftaa` Board (2017)

Chairperson: Dr Mohammad al-Khalayleh, Grand Mufti of Jordan

Sheikh AbdulkareemKhasawneh/ Member

Prof. Abdullah Al-Fawaz

 Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat/ Member

Dr. Moh. Khair Al-Esa/ Member

Dr. Majid Drawsheh/ Member

Sheikh Sa`eidHijawi/ Member           

 Judge Khalid Woraikat/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zou`bi/ Member   

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is it acceptable to perform the Aqiqah for a male child by slaughtering and distributing the first sheep, and bringing the second one cooked from the restaurant?

 

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

It is permissible to slaughter the first sheep with the intention of Aqiqah (the newborn's sacrificial offering) and distribute it entirely [uncooked], and to slaughter the second sheep and have it cooked at a restaurant to bring home for the household. However, it must be noted that it is obligatory to give some portion of the Aqiqah in charity to the poor, even if it is a small amount, though it is preferable to send the food cooked to them.

Buying a pre-cooked, ready-made sheep from a restaurant does not suffice as an Aqiqah. However, if an agreement is made with the restaurant to explicitly slaughter a sheep with the intention of Aqiqah for the newborn, and then cook it afterward, this is permissible.

In conclusion, slaughtering the sheep and distributing it with the intention of Aqiqah is permissible, and through it, the foundational prophetic tradition (Sunnah) is fulfilled. As for simply buying a cooked sheep from a restaurant that was not specifically slaughtered with the intention of Aqiqah, it will not count as such. Conversely, if the restaurant owner is commissioned (Wakala) to handle both the slaughtering and the cooking as an Aqiqah, it is valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on sacrificing a castrated animal or one with a missing tail?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to sacrifice a castrated sheep; as it has been established that the Prophet (peace be upon him) sacrificed:
 
"...two large, fat, horned, white-and-black, castrated rams (Mawju'ayn—meaning having crushed testicles)." [Narrated by Ibn Majah in his Sunan].
 
It is not permissible to sacrifice an animal that is missing its tail, or udder due to being cut off. This is in contrast to an animal that was naturally born without a tail, or udder; such an animal is valid for sacrifice. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

Someone wiped over his shoes after wearing them in a state of purity, then took them off and prayed without them?

Ablution is not invalidated by taking off leather socks or shoes after wiping over them. However, whoever takes them off after wiping must wash his feet only. If he prayed without washing his feet, he must wash his feet and repeat the prayer. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More