عنوان مقاله [English]
Testimony is one of the most important proofs for substantiating an argument to the extent that is considered as a collective obligation. This is because the court judgment is issued on the basis of witness remarks which might have various consequences. If the witness denies his remarks or his remarks are proved to be false, the losses of the one suffering from his witness should be covered. The rules and regulations governing civil liability have provided a good ground for covering these losses. The present study, owing to the importance of comparative jurisprudence which improves the relationships of Islamic denominations and modifies biased prejudices, investigates the factors affecting civil liabilities of witnesses and the similarities and differences between Imami and Hanafi jurisprudence in this regard. The verdicts of jurisprudents of denominations in many issues are similar, such as preserving the verdicts issued by court after withdrawing the testimony by the witness in financial affairs. There are some slight differences between Imami and Hanafi jurisprudence in terms of the lack of responsibility of the witness in Hanafi jurisprudence and the responsibility of the witness in Imami jurisprudence as well as the lack of responsibility of witness in the case of withdrawing the testimony before the court issues a verdict in Shiite jurisprudence and the responsibility of the witness in this case in Hanafi jurisprudence.