Legal Constraints on the Modification of Product Liability: A Comparative Study in French, Iraqi, and Iranian Legislations

Abstract

This research, extracted from the second chapter of a master’s thesis, addresses the modification of product liability through an analytical study of both mitigation and intensification mechanisms. It focuses on the legal constraints imposed by comparative civil legislations on such modifications. The study explores the legitimacy of contractual agreements aiming to exempt or increase a producer’s liability and their compatibility with the principle of public order, especially in contracts involving consumers, The findings reveal that the French legal system provides strict consumer protection and prohibits any clause that reduces a producer’s liability for bodily harm. In contrast, Iraqi law allows for mitigation, provided there is no fraud or gross negligence. Iranian law, however, is based on traditional jurisprudential foundations that prioritize the producer’s awareness of the defect and tend to weaken the position of the injured party, The study recommends enacting a specific Iraqi statute regulating product liability in alignment with the European directive, strengthening judicial oversight over contractual clauses, and promoting a culture of consumer protection in both legislation and practice.

There is a necessary distinction between relationships between professionals and between professionals and consumers, as some modifications are acceptable in the former and strongly rejected in the latter.It has been shown that judicial oversight plays a pivotal role in invalidating unfair conditions, even in the absence of explicit texts, particularly in French and Iraqi law.