Civil Liability of the Judge and Its Evolution in the Imamiyah Jurisprudence and Law of Iran and France

Owing to the importance of the position of adjudication, the judges have a sort of immunity in most legal systems in order not to be under pressure, to feel comfortable in issuance of judgment, and concentrate on finding the facts and laws of the cases submitted. However, due to some factors, judge's decision may cause material or moral damage to one of the parties in which case the impossibility of compensation is contrary to fairness and justice. But whether sue must be against the state or the judge is controversial. This study that is written through a descriptive-analytic method and by employing a library-based approached, aims at settling this problem. In the French law, the damages initially are compensated by the government, and the government has the right to refer to him if the damages are caused by the intentional or heavy fault of the judge. In Iran’s law, in the intentional or grave fault or unforgivable mistake of the judge the lawsuit is conducted against him and otherwise, would be against the state. While, the new Code of Criminal Procedure enacted in 1392/2013 as regards the damage arising from an imprisonment resulted in acquittal has followed the same method which is enforced in French law and other advanced systems according to which the state is responsible for compensating the injured and meanwhile, the right of the state to refer to the blameworthy judge is reserved that ensures the rights of the injured. Therefore, extension of this statement to cases where the fault or the mistake of the judge causes the material and moral loss to the parties, will advance the justice and increasingly secure the rights of the aggrieved party.