Translation of legal rules and judicial principles

Article (209) of the Labor Law No. 12 of 2003 stipulates: "the establishment and its branches shall take all precautions and measures as necessary to provide the means of vocational safety and health and ensuring labor environment security for protection from mechanical dangers resulting from colliding the worker's body with a solid body, particularly the following:

(B) All danger arising from construction, building and digging works, and risk of collapse and down fall."

 Article (163) of the Egyptian Civil Code, "whereby every fault, which causes an injury to another, imposes an obligation to make reparation upon the person by whom it is committed. Thus, three elements must be present for tort liability to arise: (i) a fault or error; (ii) damage to another; and (iii) a casual connection between the fault and damage. And the fault in the presumed liability is based on two elements; (i) material (which is the infringement, and it measured objectively) and (ii) moral (which is realization)"

(Review Sources of Obligations, second book by Dr. Abd el-Razzak el-Sanhuri, 1981 edition, page 1080 and beyond)

A fault may be either an act or a failure to act. As the obligation of not causing damage to a third party requires foresight to act.

"Explanatory note of a preliminary draft for the Civil Code"

As per to the well-established case-law of the Court of Cassation (the term "fault" shall in the application of the provisions of Article 163 of the Civil Code, mean negligence and intentional act, and the legislator on tort does not distinguish between intentional tort and unintentional tort or  between fatal error and minor error. Each of them requires compensating as a result of the damage arising from it, and the tort arise as a result of not taking precautions due to negligence)

(Civil Cassation, hearing of 17/12/1986, Appeal no. 1075 of the year 50 Judicial)

Whereas, (the legal characterization of the act that the compensation claim is based on, whether it's a tort or rejecting that term, is one of the legal issues that the Trial Court is subject to the supervision of the Court of Cassation.)

(Civil Cassation, hearing of 4/3/1986, year 32, first part, page 755)

Conventionally, (the deducing of tort falls within the scope of the discretionary power of the Trial Court, as long as that deduce is admissible and derives from the elements of the action. While the deduce of the casual connection between the fault and damage, is one of the issues that is subject to the decision of the trial judge without the supervision of the Court of Cassation as long as that deduce is admissible).

   (Civil Cassation, hearing of 30/4/1975, Appeal no. 448 of the year 52 Judicial)