Judicial principles and studies
Compensation for Damage from Harmful Acts: Direct and Causal Liability (Expert Opinion)
Brief summary outlining the three elements of tort liability (harmful act, damage, causation), noting that concealing a narcotic constitutes an unlawful act fulfilling the first element. It also explains how direct causation can trigger liability regardless of intent.
Updated: 10 September 2026
Prepared and reviewed by: Ashraf Al-Khawaja
Subject
The study outlines tort liability founded on three core elements: the harmful act (conduct that violates the law or exceeds a lawful right), the damage suffered by the injured party, and the causal link between act and result. It notes the defendant's admission of hiding a narcotic outside the claimant's home before the State Security Court as an example of unlawful conduct.
Summary
Concealing a narcotic constitutes unlawful conduct and thus fulfills the harmful-act element, making compensation possible if damage and causation are proven. Directness means that a person whose act directly produced the harm bears absolute liability without requiring proof of intent to trespass or to harm; the causal nexus between act and outcome suffices, even if the actor lacks legal capacity. This is an educational summary and not judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance
Classifying conduct as unlawful (for example, hidden narcotics possession) supports establishing the harmful-act element in compensation claims and makes proving causation essential for recovery. The doctrine of direct liability indicates that a defendant can be held responsible without demonstrating intent, which affects assessment of compensation claims. This is an educational summary and not judicial text or legal advice.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.