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

What is the Islamic ruling on the aqiqa?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
The 'aqīqah is a confirmed Sunnah (sunnah mu'akkadah). Two sheep are to be slaughtered for a newborn boy, and one sheep for a newborn girl. This is established by numerous Prophetic traditions, among them:
The narration of Samurah ibn Jundub, may Allah be pleased with him, who reported that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Every child is held in pledge for his 'aqīqah, which is slaughtered on his behalf on the seventh day, and he is named, and his head is shaved." — Narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it as ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ.
And the narration of 'Ā'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, who said: "The Messenger of Allah ﷺ commanded us to slaughter one sheep as 'aqīqah for a girl, and two sheep for a boy." — Narrated by Aḥmad and Ibn Mājah.
The imperative in these narrations is understood to denote recommendation rather than obligation, based on the ḥadīth of 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb, on the authority of his father, on the authority of his grandfather, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ was asked about the 'aqīqah, whereupon he said: "Allah does not love 'uqūq" — as though he disliked the name itself — and then said: "Whoever has a child born to him and wishes to offer a sacrifice on their behalf, let them do so: two equivalent sheep for a boy, and one sheep for a girl." — Narrated by Aḥmad and Abū Dāwūd.
The legal inference drawn from this narration is that the Prophet ﷺ linked the slaughter to the wish and willingness of the individual, saying: "whoever wishes to offer a sacrifice... let them do so" — thereby indicating that the 'aqīqah is recommended (mustaḥabb) and not obligatory (wājib).
And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is a woman's prayer performed while following an Imam whose prayer is being broadcasted via the television valid, and does she receive the reward of congregational prayer?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Among the conditions for the validity of following an Imam (Iqtida’) is that the Imam and the follower must be in the same location. Therefore, the prayer of one who follows an Imam whose prayer is being broadcasted via television from a distant location is not valid. However, if the follower is with the Imam in the same mosque, the prayer is valid. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

What is the ruling on one who vows to fast a specific or non-specific year? Are the two Eids, the days of Tashreeq, Ramadan, and the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding included in them? And do these days break the consecutiveness if it was intended?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If someone makes a vow (Nadr) to fast a specific, designated year, this vow does not include the days of Eid, the days of Tashreeq (the three days following Eid al-Adha), Ramadan, or the days of menstruation (Hayd) and postnatal bleeding (Nifas). Furthermore, there is no requirement to make up (Qada) these specific days.
 
However, if someone vows to fast a year that is not specifically designated (i.e., any twelve-month period) and stipulates that the fasting must be consecutive, they are bound by that condition. They must not fast on the days of Eid, during Ramadan, or during menstruation, but they are required to make up these days afterward—with the exception of the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, which do not need to be made up.
 
It is stated in Hashiyat al-Bajuri ‘ala Sharh Ibn Qasim ({Vol.2/P.606): 'If one vows to fast a specific year, the Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, and days of menstruation or postnatal bleeding are not included. This is because Ramadan does not accept any fast other than its own, and the others do not accept fasting at all. Therefore, they do not enter into the vow, and no makeup is required for them because they are legally excluded—contrary to Al-Rafi’i regarding menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
 
If one vows to fast a non-designated year: if they stipulated consecutiveness (Tatuabu’) in their vow, they must fulfill it; otherwise, they are not bound to it. Consecutiveness is not broken by the days that do not enter into the specific year vow (Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, menstruation, and postnatal bleeding). However, one must make up the days missed—excluding the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding—immediately following the end of the year. As for the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, it is not made up, contrary to Ibn al-Rif’ah, who argued that it must be made up just like Ramadan.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

 
What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks thinking that the sun has set, then realizes that it has not yet set?

Whoever eats or drinks believing that the sun has set, then later discovers that it has not yet set, their fast is invalid, and they must make up that day after Ramadan. It is not permissible to break the fast before confirming sunset—either by seeing it, through personal reasoning, or by relying on the statement of someone trustworthy in their religious commitment.

See More