CEIAI Governance Database
Back to the database
Record STMT-WD2AB1EAspirational

Challenges in Realizing Civil Liability in Robotic Technology

Report State lawWestern Asia · IRin force

This academic study examines the legal and jurisprudential challenges of establishing civil and criminal liability for autonomous robots and artificial intelligence systems. It analyzes various forms of harmful acts, including direct positive harms and omissions related to the duty of care in Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence. The paper concludes that since robots lack legal personhood, human operators or controllers bear the responsibility for compensating damages.

Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.

Who issued it

KMAN Publication Inc.Academic
Publisher
Legal forceAspirational
Under whose authorityState law
Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

Researchers and academicsLegislatorsRegulators

Researchers, legal scholars, and lawmakers studying the intersection of robotics, artificial intelligence, and civil liability.

Sectors
Research and science · academic research

What the document contains

What's covered

The document addresses the legal and jurisprudential foundations of civil and criminal liability for AI-enabled robots, examining positive harmful acts, abuse of rights, omissions in duties of care, and the requirements of causation under Islamic jurisprudence and Iranian law.

What's missing

Specific statutory legislation or binding regulatory enforcement frameworks for AI deployment.

Key takeaways
  • Autonomous robots and AI systems can act independently, generating novel challenges for criminal and civil liability.
  • Because robots lack legal or natural personhood, they cannot independently bear responsibility for damages.
  • Human agents controlling or supervising robots are obligated to provide compensation for damages under principles such as the 'respect' theory and tasbib.
  • Both positive harmful acts and omissions related to the duty of care can trigger civil liability in robotic technology.
  • Establishing a valid causal relationship and customary attribution is essential for determining the liable party when multiple causes contribute to harm.
Principles it states
La Dharar (no harm)Itlaf (destruction)Tasbib (causation)Ihsan (benevolence)Ghoroor (deception)
Outline
· 1. Introduction
· 2. The Necessity of Accepting Criminal Liability for AI-Enabled Robots
  - 2.1. Free Will as the Basis of Criminal Liability
  - 2.2. AI-Enabled Robots as Tools for Crime
· 3. Types of Harmful Acts in Robotic Technology
  - 3.1. Absolute Positive Harmful Acts
  - 3.2. Harmful Acts Resulting from Abuse of Rights
  - 3.3. Examination of Omission and Its Role in Generating Civil Liability
· 4. Types of Omissions in Robotic Technology
  - 4.1. Omission Stemming from the Obligation to Care for Objects and Animals
  - 4.2. Omission Stemming from the Obligation to Care for Individuals
· 5. Causation
  - 5.1. Examining Customary Attribution and Its Relationship to Causation
  - 5.2. Determining the Liable Cause
· 6. Conclusion
Issued1 December 2024
Length9,401 words · 13 pages
FormatNot recorded
Scopenational

How it scores

Pending review

Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.

Accountability

4/5

Clear responsibility for AI outcomes

In such cases, the human agent controlling the robot is obligated to provide compensation under the "respect" theory. This means that, as robots lack legal or natural personhood and cannot independently bear responsibility for damages, the burden falls on humans.

ABSTRACT

screening score · 2026-10-23

Fairness

0/5

Non-discrimination and equitable treatment

screening score · 2026-10-23

Human Dignity

0/5

Respect for the inherent worth of persons

screening score · 2026-10-23

Human Oversight

3/5

Humans remain in control of consequential decisions

On one hand, it i s imperative to ensure that robots operate safely and remain under human control.

6. Conclusion

screening score · 2026-10-23

Privacy

0/5

Protection of personal data and private life

screening score · 2026-10-23

Transparency

0/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

screening score · 2026-10-23

Enforcement

3/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

This underscores the necessity of considering ethical and legal dimensions in the design and use of robots. Furthermore, it highli ghts the need for appropriate legal frameworks to support users and ensure robots are under control.

ABSTRACT

screening score · 2026-10-23

Impact Assessment

0/5

Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use

screening score · 2026-10-23

Topics

Physical AI Governancesupporting
civil_liability robotics artificial_intelligence jurisprudence causation