A Comparative Study of Civil Liability for Sporting Accidents (Based on Fault) between Iranian and Common Law

In private law, it is very important to define the basis of civil liability. As Stark puts it, it is no exaggeration to say that civil liability is the most important thing in private law. In civil liability, it is said that no one should harm another and no harm should be left without compensation. The rules of civil liability are so flexible in some cases that they pass by some damages without compensation. In other words, some activities, the most prominent of which are sports activities, on the one hand, cause harms, and on the other hand, have found so much social, spiritual and material value that they force the rules of responsibility to comply with their rights. Civil liability, which demands compensation for all damages, should give up its slogan.Injured consent was initially considered a complete defense in the Commonwealth. Violence and injury are unintended consequences of the increasing spread of sport. An important part of the losses and injuries are related to sports operations (games and sports competitions). This research seeks to examine the responsibility of athletes in sporting events and to determine the circumstances in which a person is held responsible. The role of fault in sports accidents in Iranian and common law is also examined. In common Law when a person does the job carelessly and the result is harm to another according to the law, the offender is responsible for any damage she has caused. Determining the basis of liability and the athlete responsible for injury in sports accidents is an important issue in civil liability. In fact, civil liability seeks to restore the right to the victim and leave no harm without compensation. To identify the person responsible for sports accidents, one must refer to two important features of sports activities, namely, the doctrine of inherent dangers and the doctrine of risk acceptance. The principle of inherent risk and acceptance of risk is also accepted in our law and the ability to cite is considered a criterion of responsibility, but this criterion does not negate the principle of fault and fault is at the heart of this concept of citation.