Basically, the compensation of damage is the main purpose of Indemnity Insurance contract that is founded on the principle of indemnity. According to this principle, the full compensation of e victim’s losses, up to ceiling of insurer’s obligations, is the main and inherent effects of Indemnity Insurance contract in insurance law. Thus, the main obligation of an insurer in the indemnity insurance is compensation so the victim should be placed in a situation that it was if the insured risk actually has not occurred.Thus, in the Indemnity Insurance contract “the Indemnity principle” as the underlying principle has two function. First, the insurer should compensate the damage incurred to property insured in property insurance and to insured person in personal liability insurance up to ceiling of insurer’s obligations completely. Therefore, compensation should placed the victim in a situation that it was if the insured risk actually has not occurred.Second, compensation and payment of damages should not increase the victim assets since the insurance should never be a source of profit for the victims. This principle is the binding rule of the insurance contracts according to it, the insurer is committed to compensate the victim’s actual damage (assessed) up to ceiling of her obligations, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.

One of the basic principles of civil liability law accepted by some jurists and legal systems is “The Principle of the possibility Compensate for the Loss” or “the Principle of the Principle of the possibility of compensation of all damages.” This principle, accepted in French law and widely welcomed in Iranian law doctrine, is not older than a century and encounters much denial and doubt in many legal systems.In religious jurisprudence, too, many jurists have supported this principle and on the basis of “The Rule of No Loss” have considered it a definite religious principle. On the contrary, some famous religious jurists have shown disagreement with this principle and have not accepted it. This article concluded that although “The Principle of the Necessity to Compensate for All Losses” cannot be considered a definite religious one, accepting it does not face any religious hurdles.

The period that the parties intentionally communicate with each other to make a contract as a final draft or ignore it, is called pre-contractual period.In this period, parties negotiate together on the terms of future contract and use their most endeavors till to reach the final point i.e. making the contract.It may be situations which one of the parties has been incurred some costs at this period, while another party closes the negotiations unilaterally. The principle of freedom of contract has the consequence of acceptance of precontractual risks by the parties. However, sometimes damaged person may find compensation right and the other party is obliged to compensate on the basis of special reasons. Liability to compensate for such losses will be called pre-contractual liability. Nowadays, pre-contractual liability has been considered by legal system of some countries like France.

The principle of tort law is that the liability is based on the act prejudicial that in Iranian law in conformity with the article 1 of Tort Law Code and in French law in conformity with the article 1382 of Civil Code, this act must be guilty. The harmful act in determining responsible in tort law is necessary. If the chain of causes of action for compensation for damaging responsible is a person who has committed a fault. In addition to the traditional basis of the theory of fault, there are other foundations, such as the theory of complex, theory of garanty or theory of obligation of security. However, all these comments have one thing in common that harmful act is necessary for liability. The origin of these new approaches is sometimes conventions and customs in some countries. However, these comments can be found in the literature of law of obligations in France law. Nowadays, as well as this rule, there are some other theories that relate to the scope of the necessity of act in determining the responsible person to remedy the damages. These theories are mainly originated from French law that will be studied comparatively in this article.

The first definition of sexual harassment which comes to mind is a behavior with force and violence. But is sexual harassment restricted to these behaviors? Apparently, sexual harassment comprises of a wide range; a range with rape on its one side (article 224 of the Criminal Code) and using offensive words (article 619 of the Ta’ zirat part of the Criminal Code) containing sexual concept on the other. The conduct and talk which causes harm to someone just because of his/her sex. This concept is consistent with the spirit and purpose of the tort law which is for protection of victims. Moreover, this concept makes our legal system in line with other legal systems’ movement. However, Sexual harassment usually happens without the consent of the victim and by the use of force. But sometimes despite the consent of the victim, this consent is considered null and void since it is the result of duress, fraud, or pressure. Sexual harassment causes different types of damages such as physical or mental which have to be compensated in accordance with the “ no harm” principle. In our legal system, blood money and the sum of money which is paid for the loss of virginity and the criminal relish are considered as different kinds of compensation. Also, mental and moral damage is awarded according to article 1 and 9 of the Iranian Civil Liability Code, and 14 of Iranian Criminal Procedure Code. Knowing legal aspects of this issue leads to respecting of moral aspects. Additionally, in this article, the sexual harassment as well as its related damages and compensations under Iranian law are investigated.

Associated gases are by-products of the oil extraction process that can either be commercialized or flared, the latter turning them into environmental pollutants. Opting for the former over the latter depends on several factors, one of which is an appropriate legal framework. A crucial aspect of creating this framework is the anticipation of legal methods for compensating damages incurred by affected communities and the environment. Given that Iran ranks among the top three countries in the world for flaring associated gases, establishing an efficient legal structure in this area seems imperative, with the anticipation of compensation methods being a significant component. This research, using a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to answer whether the liability system for compensating damages resulting from associated gas emissions is sufficient, and what other methods for compensating these damages might exist. The hypothesis of this article is that the civil liability system is insufficient for compensating environmental damages, including those caused by associated gases, and that reforms are needed in this area. Additionally, the potential of international liability can be utilized, or innovative methods such as creating a compensation fund for local communities using the revenue from fines imposed for associated gas emissions can be employed.

That men need to enjoy the environment health and appropriate and desirable environmental scope in all respects so as to maintain their lives has been long construed by national, transnational and international rules and regulations as one of the undeniable and indisputable social and life rights. Civil law is one of the criteria, which underline the necessity of responsibility of conservation of the environment. If men look for the healthy environment, they should then look for techniques that guarantee prevention and Compensation of damages to the environment that undoubtedly, the enjoyment of legal techniques, in general, and the exertion of civil liability, in particular, should be underlined. The acceptance of the civil liability arising from the damages caused to the environment and its various aspects and components as well as the obligation of the perpetrators of such damages to compensate them are deemed as one of the effective legal and supportive actions for this common legacy of the humanity. And with the damage elements being realized, one may demand the compensation of the damages to the environment of their perpetrators through a civil action in addition to the existence of criminal liability. And finally, with this liability and its obligations being accepted, future damages to the environment may be remarkably prevented.

Full compensation for lost is not usually achieved by citing a loss to one of the remedies of breach of contract. Rather, it is sometimes necessary to aggregate between the above remedies. The sum of the compensation with other reactions to the breach of the covenant is very vague given the legislator's silence on its enforce ability and lack of judicial procedure. Regardless of the feasibility of this sum and its enforcement practices, the possibility of this sum is very important, given the general legal principles underlying most laws, and these principles are used to resolve ambiguities. In other words, is it possible that, in the use of lost to one of the remedies arising from breach of contract, such as rescission, and failure to full compensation, we will give right to lost to use other remedies, such as claiming of loss or amending the contract, or partial rescission of the contract, or specific performance and claim of loss between two or more remedies to full compensations for their damages, collect and use simultaneously.