Judicial principles and studies
Tort Liability, Burden of Proof, Expert-Report Discrepancies and Effect on Interest Claims
A brief summary of principles on tort liability, required evidentiary elements, how differing expert reports affect claims, and treatment of legal interest under power of attorney.
Compensation and insurance
Judicial principles and studies
Updated: 10 September 2026
Editorial summary of a judicial principle or decision; consult the source below and do not treat the firm as the author of the decision.
Smart reading summary
Understand and share the study quickly
A brief summary of principles on tort liability, required evidentiary elements, how differing expert reports affect claims, and treatment of legal interest under power of attorney.
Key points
- Subject
- Summary
- Practical significance
Useful for: Useful for initial reading and identifying questions that may need legal review.
This automatic summary is based on the published text. It is not legal advice and does not replace checking official sources and reviewing the facts with a qualified lawyer.
AI generation is optional and subject to Gemini usage limits. Do not send client data or attachments from this card.
Subject
The official points address application of tort liability and the burden of proof for damages arising from works on property, the role of technical expert reports, how discrepancies between reports are treated, and the effect of power-of-attorney limits on claims for legal interest.
Summary
- Where plaintiffs base their claim on tort (Article 256), acts performed on the property are attributed to its owner and Article 1021 need not be applied; this principle is drawn from a prior cassation decision No. 1245/2022. - Relevant civil provisions require proof of damage, the act, the causative agent, and the causal link between them; this principle is also drawn from cassation decision No. 1245/2022. - If evidence shows excavation works directly caused the damages, the dispute exists between the party who performed the excavation and the claimant (principle drawn from a prior cassation decision). - Court-ordered inspection and technical expertise are admissible means of proof for the trial court; the court of cassation does not re-evaluate them so long as they comply with the law and produce an acceptable conclusion. - If experts do not specify compensation values per damage, repair costs, required materials and their values, whether the building becomes safe after repairs, or lost profits for the periods of the damaging works and repairs, the appellate court must summon the experts for discussion and order a supplementary report or a new expertise as appropriate. - Tort liability covers material damage and lost profits once those damages are realized. - When the elements of compensation differ across expert reports (for example, some reports assess only diminution in land value while another lists only repair items), the principle of a "wide discrepancy" cannot be applied. - If a special power of attorney did not authorize the agent to claim legal interest, not awarding legal interest is consistent with the law. Note: This is a general educational summary based on the official points provided; it is not a judicial text nor legal advice.
Practical significance
This is a general educational summary based on the points published in the official source. It does not replace the original material or a review by Ashraf Al-Khawaja before relying on it for any action.
Frequently asked questions
Subject?
The official points address application of tort liability and the burden of proof for damages arising from works on property, the role of technical expert reports, how discrepancies between reports are treated, and the effect of power-of-attorney limits on claims for legal interest.
Summary?
- Where plaintiffs base their claim on tort (Article 256), acts performed on the property are attributed to its owner and Article 1021 need not be applied; this principle is drawn from a prior cassation decision No. 1245/2022. - Relevant civil provisions require proof of damage, the act, the causative agent, and the causal link between them; this principle is also drawn from cassation decision No. 1245/2022. - If evidence shows excavation works directly caused the damages, the dispute exists between the party who performed the excavation and the claimant (principle drawn from a prior cassation decision). - Court-ordered inspection and technical expertise are admissible means of proof for the trial court; the court of cassation does not re-evaluate them so long as they comply with the law and produce an acceptable conclusion. - If experts do not specify compensation values per damage, repair costs, required materials and their values, whether the building becomes safe after repairs, or lost profits for the periods of the damaging works and repairs, the appellate court must summon the experts for discussion and order a supplementary report or a new expertise as appropriate. - Tort liability covers material damage and lost profits once those damages are realized. - When the elements of compensation differ across expert reports (for example, some reports assess only diminution in land value while another lists only repair items), the principle of a "wide discrepancy" cannot be applied. - If a special power of attorney did not authorize the agent to claim legal interest, not awarding legal interest is consistent with the law. Note: This is a general educational summary based on the official points provided; it is not a judicial text nor legal advice.
Practical significance?
This is a general educational summary based on the points published in the official source. It does not replace the original material or a review by Ashraf Al-Khawaja before relying on it for any action.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.
Study collection
Real estate and leases
Browse the other studies in this subject through its dedicated topical section.
Open study collectionA related service path
Commercial and civil litigation
If this study is close to your matter, review the service scope and contact the firm to discuss the facts and documents.
Review the related serviceRelated Jordanian-law guides
Contextual links to related public guide routes; they remain limited to Jordanian law and do not replace matter review.