A jurisprudential and legal study of the conflict between the rule of benevolence (Ihsan) and the rules of Itlaf and Tasbeeb

Ihsan rule is one of the jurisprudential rules of law that is used in different chapters of jurisprudence and various legal issues.This rule includes the general rule that if a person acts with the intention of aiding and abetting in order to avoid harm or gain another's benefit, and, incidentally, her action causes damage, she will not be liable for damages.Therefore, Ihsan's rule, like Yad Amani rule, has been considered as one of the canceler of warranty of civil liability of course, if there is no Deviation and fault. In order to prevent civil liability and forfeiture, For someone who has been provided with a forcible guarantee, there are some factors that interpreted as cancelers of forcible guarantee. One of the cancelers of forcible guarantee Ihsan; This means that if someone causes harm to others for the sake of service and benevolence, his action is not obligatory. on the other hand, according to the rules of Itlaf and Tasbeeb, If a person intentionally or unintentionally, directly or indirectly, causes the loss of an object or property, he is the guarantor. The research question is that: in case of conflict between Ihsan's rule and the rules of Itlaf and Tasbeeb, which one of them is effective in issuing a verdict? This article is based on the opinions of two Imami jurists, Mir Fattah Maraghehiee and Mohaqeq Damad in a descriptive and analytical way, to provide a clear answer to the research question. The findings show that if there is no preference, both reasons will be invalidated.