The Place of the Preservation of Ownership Requirement in the Laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran

The physician is responsible and obliged to compensate the patient for the damage when it is proven that he/she was guilty. The main goal of this paper is the comparative analysis of the physician's civil responsibility in British and U.S. law. The obligations of the physicians in the British law are divided into two parts: commitment to treatment, in which the physician's responsibility is based on a guilt; and commitment to the safety of the patient, in which as has been proposed, the physician is responsible for it without determining the guilty. In the U.S. legal system, the physicians' obligations under the California Medical Remedy Amendment Act 2012 are divided into two parts: commitment to treatment, in which the physician's responsibility is based on a guilt, and commitment to the safety of the patient, in which as has been proposed, the physician is responsible for it without determining the guilty. This rule is partly aligned with the basis adopted by the U.S. law system and the Common Law. This is while in the British law, intention and carelessness are two independent reasons for civil responsibility claims. In the United Kingdom, there are three conditions for the person to take the responsibility of his/her carelessness: 1) the person who makes the damage has an assignment for caring the injured party; 2) he/she violates this assignment with an unconventional function; 3) the violation of the assignment had resulted in damage to the injured party. It will be addressed in the present research.