The Indirect Lawsuit in the Saudi Civil Transactions System Compared to Islamic Jurisprudence

Abstract

Contemporary laws pay great attention to the issue of protecting debts and ensuring the implementation of obligations because of their tangible impact on the circulation of funds and economic activity, and stipulate in their laws a number of guarantees for this purpose, in the context of legislative development in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the new civil transactions system enacted a number of these methods, this research studied one of them and was entitled “The indirect lawsuit in the Saudi civil transactions system compared to Islamic jurisprudence.” It tried to answer a number of questions about its definition, nature, conditions, and effects, compared to Islamic jurisprudence. It concluded with a number of results, the most important of which are: that indirect lawsuit is based on two basic ideas: the interest of the creditor in ensuring the debtor’s fulfillment and not procrastinating, and the legal representation of the debtor when he does not claim those rights according to the conditions stipulated by the system, Saudi system has enacted conditions and procedures regulating them in a way that guarantees their effectiveness and the absence of abuse in their use, and the jurisprudence is not without Islamic Sharia jurists from a number of branches as they said that it is permissible for a creditor to use the rights of his debtor, but they came in various branches scattered in the chapters of jurisprudence and not as an integrated legislative principle.