مسئولیت مدنی دولت در قبال خسارات ناشی از مقرره‌گذاری غیرقانونی و مقررات قانونی زیان‌بار

The expansion of the State’s powers in regulating and administering public affairs has led to the development of rulemaking through regulations, executive bylaws, resolutions, and other implementing instruments. Despite the fundamental role of such regulations in implementing laws and organizing social relations, their adoption or implementation may cause damage to individuals. This issue becomes particularly significant where a governmental regulation exceeds the limits of legal authority or is inconsistent with the law, as well as in situations where a regulation, despite having a legal basis, causes harm to individuals in the course of its implementation. The present study was conducted using a descriptive-analytical method and drawing upon statutory sources, legal doctrine, and judicial practice.

The findings of the study demonstrate that the State cannot be regarded as enjoying absolute immunity from the harmful consequences of its rulemaking activities. Legislative rulemaking and executive rulemaking differ in terms of the source of authority, the scope of powers, and the basis of liability. With respect to executive regulations, the State is required to act within the limits of its statutory authority and in conformity with superior laws. تجاوز از these limits may, in addition to rendering the regulation subject to annulment, provide a basis for holding the State liable to compensate damages, provided that the elements of civil liability are established.

Furthermore, the legality of a regulation does not necessarily imply the complete exclusion of liability. In such cases, liability requires the establishment of compensable damage, the attribution of the harm to the conduct of the State, and the existence of a direct and immediate causal relationship. An examination of judicial practice also indicates that the annulment of a regulation and the award of damages constitute two distinct legal institutions