Negative tort in the civil liability

Abstract In this study, I examined the negative tort in the civil liability, and explained through it whether this tort or abstention is considered to be as a cause of civil liability as well as in the positive tort, or that the tort or abstention is not considered in the law and jurisprudence. For this reason, I outlined the study into two chapters: the first is specified to study the general rules in the negative tort and involves two issues: the first offered it to define the negative tort, and distinguish it from the positive tort, and demonstrating the fundamental basis of the distinction between them. Also, I explained the extent of submission to the general rules in the tort by indicating the position of jurisprudence and judiciary. In the second part, I examined the nature of the negative tort through the statement of the position of jurisprudence which sees this tort as a state of no effect, and is based on the philosophical and legal foundations, and the statement of the position of the other side of jurisprudence which sees the abstention as a case of an effect based on the philosophical and legal foundations as well. The second chapter is dedicated to study images of negative tort and its applications through two issues. I explained in the first issue images of abstention in terms of being a mere abstention or failure of an unprecedented commitment and stated the position of jurists and law to establish liability on them .The second topic dealt with the most prominent applications of the negative tort which includes refraining from physical and legal work, and refraining from contracting and helps others. At the end, I put a conclusion which recorded the most important findings and observations that drove me to it, and revealed by research to address the subject in all its aspects.