Related Links
Statistics
| Number of Journals | 32 |
| Number of Issues | 554 |
| Number of Articles | 5,380 |
| Article View | 8,161,418 |
| PDF Download | 6,064,433 |
Instances of Civil Liability Arising from Artificial Intelligence in Iranian Law and the European Union | ||
| پژوهشنامه حقوق تطبیقی | ||
| Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available Online from 07 January 2026 | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.22080/lps.2025.29897.1787 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Leila Javanmard* 1; Seyed Noorollah Shahrokhi2; Negar Alikhani3 | ||
| 1Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran. | ||
| 2Ph.D. in Private Law, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran. | ||
| 3Master of Private Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Lorestan, Khorramabad, Iran. | ||
| Receive Date: 12 September 2025, Revise Date: 02 December 2025, Accept Date: 15 December 2025 | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Objectives: This research compares the legal foundations and challenges in allocating civil liability for damages caused by Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, particularly in "high-risk" applications (e.g., autonomous vehicles, medical diagnostic errors). It aims to identify evidentiary hurdles in fault-based liability due to the opaque "Black Box" nature of AI and propose suitable regulatory solutions for the Iranian legal system compared to the European Union’s new frameworks. Methodology: The study employs a descriptive-analytical and comparative method. It analyzes general civil liability rules and existing protective laws in Iran (e.g., E-Commerce Law) alongside the latest EU legal developments, including the AI Act, the revised Product Liability Directive (PLD), and the proposed Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive (AILD) principles. Findings: Findings reveal a legislative vacuum in Iran, making traditional rules inefficient for AI damage compensation. The European Union adopts a dual framework: strict liability for producers covering structural defects, and facilitated fault-based liability (with presumption of causality) for providers/deployers of high-risk systems. This distinction, based on risk distribution, protects the injured party against complex evidentiary issues. Conclusion: Current legal systems require significant reform to address the evidentiary challenges and lack of transparency in high-risk AI. For Iran, enacting specialized regulations based on a Risk-Based Approach and shifting the burden of proof for high-risk systems are indispensable. In the short term, strengthening "effective human oversight" and imposing stricter professional negligence standards on human operators can partially bridge this gap. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Civil Liability; Artificial Intelligence; Black Box; Strict Liability; Facilitated Fault; EU AI Act; Presumption of Causality | ||
| References | ||
|
| ||
|
Statistics Article View: 220 |
||