The burden of proof on civil liability (A comparative study of contractual and non-contractual liability)

There are objections to the legal status of a person seeking a change in his or her interest and a lawsuit. Accordingly, the present situation must be in accordance with the rules and principles, and the person seeking change must be required to present his or her arguments. In the science of principles and throughout the world, the principle is that the claimant must bear the burden of proving his claim. The same can be said of Iran's Civil Procedure Code. Islamic jurisprudence also supports this view, and this has been emphasized in transnational civil procedure. The rules and principles that are raised about the claimant and the burden of proof are the same in contracts, legal events and civil liability, and the difference between the source and the origin of the obligation has no significant effect on the rules governing proof. But at the stage of applying the rules, the situation is different. It is worth noting that the court may be able to bear part of the evidence in this way by accepting its pro-active view and, in some cases, changing the position of the claimant. In this article, this issue is examined in detail.