Author(s): Mehmet ERGÜN
Abstract In ancient Roman, ancient Iranian, ancient/antique Greek, Israel-Jewish and medieval European legal systems; cases were brought against the animals because of the damages (harms=losses) they caused and they were tried. Even lawyers were assigned to defend animals in the courts. The animals, whose crime and injustice were proved, were punished with heavy sanctions. In some cases, even animal owners were punished physically (corporal punishment). Finally, Islamic law and modern law abolished the anti-humanist and inhuman practice that punished the damaging animal. However, in some cases, animal owners are held liable for the direct or indirect harms caused by the animals unlawfully. But, this responsibility is an economical liability which is totally limited to the assets of the animal owner. The clear meaning of this is: Like the animal itself is not punished for the loss caused by the animal, the liability of the animal owner is limited to the compensation of the damage caused. The topic of the article is extremely important. Because we are witnessing many damages caused by owned animals in social life. In this context, the content of the concept of animal under the title of “In the Comparat?ve Law the Compensat?on of the An?mal Damages”, the terms of the responsibility, compensation for damage, calculation of loss, the form of compensation, damage to property, damage to the interests, moral damage, the burden of proof and the right of recourse will be emphasized.
The Journal of International Social Research received 8982 citations as per Google Scholar report
