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

My brother works in a conventional bank and gave me one of the gifts distributed to bank employees — what is the ruling on accepting it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There is no objection to accepting such gifts, because the physical gift itself does not carry any inherent prohibition — unlike stolen property. Sin does not transfer or extend to the one who receives the gift, for Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "And no bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another." [Al-Anʿām/164]
The evidence for this is that the Prophet ﷺ himself ate from the food of the Jews, conducted transactions with them, and purchased from them — and it is well known that their wealth was intermingled with ribā. Similarly, the wealth of conventional ribā-based banks is a mixture of the lawful and the unlawful.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is not forbidden to transact with one whose wealth is predominantly unlawful, nor to eat from it — as al-Nawawī affirmed in al-Majmūʿ." [Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj, Vol. 9/P.389] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is Zakah (obligatory charity) due on owned land?

Zakah is due on the land used as an article of merchandise and was originally bought for that end. Zakah is due on it at the end of every lunar year. Its value is estimated, and (2.5%) of the total value of all such lands owned by the questioner is given as Zakah. However, no Zakah is due on the land used for building a house, or an agricultural purpose.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on a latecomer who joins the imam during the standing position of the first rakʿah but was unable to complete the recitation of al-Fātiḥah?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a latecomer (masbuq) joins the prayer while the imam is standing, he should begin reciting Sūrat al-Fātiḥah immediately, without pausing to recite the opening supplication (duʿāʾ al-istiftāḥ) or the seeking of refuge (taʿawwudh). If the imam bows before he completes al-Fātiḥah, he follows the imam into the bow and leaves whatever remains of al-Fātiḥah — the imam bears it on his behalf.
It is stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik (p. 47): "If a latecomer finds the imam standing and is confident that he has enough time to recite the taʿawwudh and al-Fātiḥah in full, he may do so. If he is uncertain, he should neither recite the opening supplication nor the taʿawwudh, but rather begin directly with al-Fātiḥah. If the imam bows before he completes it, he follows him into the bow — provided he had not already begun the opening supplication or the taʿawwudh. If he had begun either of them, he continues reciting al-Fātiḥah for as long as he spent on them." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More