Author
Abstract
Abstract
Division of right into real and personal is one of the most important discussions of private law in civil or Romano-German legal systems. With reference to this division, discussions about financial rights are divided into two categories: law of property and law of obligations the first being about real and the second to the personal rights. On the other hand, the words debt and object (tangible thing) are broadly applied in Islamic jurisprudence, and various and different rules devoted to them. There are certain similarities between these two and the legal terms of real and personal rights, and this made some Muslim thinkers to regard the words debt and object in Islamic jurisprudence as equal to the legal terms of real and personal rights.
This article seeks to study the question whether the legal terms of real and personal rights are equal to debt and object in nature and application, and if not, what jurisprudential concepts could be treated as their equivalents. According to the author, firstly, because of the important differences between these terms, real and personal rights could not be regarded as synonyms or alternatives to debt and object secondly, the jurisprudential words of right, property and debt are in some aspects are the same as the real and personal rights or could be compared with them.
Keywords
)