عنوان مقاله [English]
The Iranian civil code contains different conflict of law rules forpersonal status, contracts, property and the form of documents, but itdoes not contain any rule for non-contractual obligations, or civilresponsibilities. Does this silence means that civil responsibilities donot need to have any rule governing conflict? And then, should thecourts apply the Iranian law in these cases or should they apply theprinciple of territoriality according to the conflict of laws rule? Thepurpose of the present article is to demonstrate that such approaches are notcorrect and we do have any particular rule of conflict that is applicable for civilresponsibility. Hence, it is the task of doctrine and jurisprudence to identify theappropriate rule. A study of various approaches taken by different legalsystems illustrates that they generally apply the lex loci delicti while, morerecently, the freedom of choice of the parties to dispute has been accepted byEuropean Parliament. We share this approach and believe that the rule of thelex loci delicti is the best solution if the parties of dispute have not reachedan agreement on the law applicable to cases relating to civilresponsibility.Keywords: Applicable law, non-contractual obligations, Civilresponsibility, Rome Regulation II.