Article 720

Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 1 of this Law, the rules set forth in this Article shall be applied in a manner not inconsistent with legal provisions, subject to their respective nature, conditions, and exceptions. Said rules shall comprise the following:

Rule 1:

Matters shall be determined according to intentions.

Rule 2:

In contracts, effect shall be given to intention and meaning, not to form.

Rule 3:

Custom shall have legal effect.

Rule 4:

A matter established by custom shall be equivalent to a matter established by text.

Rule 5:

A matter established by custom shall be equivalent to a matter stipulated as a condition.

Rule 6:

A matter deemed highly unlikely by custom shall be equivalent to a matter deemed impossible.

Rule 7:

Certainty may not be dispelled by doubt.

Rule 8:

A matter shall be presumed unaltered.

Rule 9:

Freedom from liability shall be presumed.

Rule 10:

Contracts and conditions shall be presumed valid and binding.

Rule 11:

Claimed attributes shall be presumed false.

Rule 12:

A disputed time of an incident shall be determined according to the most likely time.

Rule 13:

A statement shall not be derived from the silence of a person, but silence shall be tantamount to a statement where a statement is required.

Rule 14:

No inference may be made in the face of an explicit statement.

Rule 15:

Erroneous conjecture shall not be deemed valid.

Rule 16:

Harm shall be removed.

Rule 17:

Harm shall not be removed by a similar harm.

Rule 18:

A greater harm shall be repelled by a lesser harm.

Rule 19:

Preventing harm shall take precedence over gaining benefit.

Rule 20:

If a prohibition and a benefit are in conflict, precedence shall be given to the prohibition.

Rule 21:

Hardship shall beget facility.

Rule 22:

The extent of necessity shall determine the extent of permissibility.

Rule 23:

Necessity shall not invalidate the rights of others.

Rule 24:

Words shall be presumed to reflect their literal meaning.

Rule 25:

Words shall be presumed to have meaning and shall not be disregarded.

Rule 26:

The absolute shall be applied in its absolute sense, unless there is evidence of restriction, either by text or implication.

Rule 27:

A description of a thing that is present shall be deemed inconsequential, but a description of a thing that is absent shall be deemed consequential.

Rule 28:

An attachment shall follow the principal.

Rule 29:

Flexibility may be exercised with attachments but not with other than attachments.

Rule 30:

A condition enforced at the outset of a matter may be overlooked during the course of said matter.

Rule 31:

The existence of an attachment shall be contingent upon the existence of the principal.

Rule 32:

No opinion may be given in the presence of a text.

Rule 33:

A person who takes possession of another person’s property shall remain liable until such property is returned.

Rule 34:

The person warranting a thing shall retain its yields.

Rule 35:

A matter without which an obligation cannot be performed shall itself be deemed an obligation.

Rule 36:

If the reason prohibiting a matter ceases to exist, such matter shall revert to its prior status.

Rule 37:

The absence of an excuse permitting a matter shall render such matter prohibited.

Rule 38:

What is forfeited may not be reinstated.

Rule 39:

If the original rule cannot be applied, the alternative rule shall be applied

Rule 40:

A person who attempts to renege on a matter shall be estopped.

Rule 41:

Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

Explanation of Article 720

Article forty-one provided a general rule, and the article explained in its introduction the order of application of these rules and the conditions for their application. As for the order of their application, the article decided that the general rule is applied in the absence of a statutory text on the matter; it restricted its application by not violating what is stipulated in the first article of this system, which states that these rules are only resorted to in the absence of a statutory text that can be applied. To affirm this meaning, this article stipulated that the application of these rules is restricted by not conflicting with a statutory text; if a general rule from these rules conflicts with a statutory text, the statutory text takes precedence. As for the conditions for applying these rules, the article decided that the nature of these rules must be taken into account, which is that they are general rules and not specific texts for certain matters; they have their conditions and exceptions; the general nature of these rules and the conditions and exceptions applicable to each rule must be considered when applying them to specific facts. When these conditions are observed, the judgment derived from these general rules—in the absence of a statutory text—takes precedence over a judgment derived from a jurisprudential effort that is not based on any of these rules, as explained in the first article of this system. The following is an explanation of these rules:

Explanation of Rule 1: الأمور بمقاصدها.

This rule means that the judgment resulting from an action or statement is based on its intended purpose; the basis of this rule is the saying of the Prophet, peace be upon him: "Actions are but by intentions" (15); a person's intention has an impact on the rulings that result from their actions, so words or actions are not taken in isolation from the indications that reveal the person's intention and purpose. (15) Agreed upon from the hadith of Umar ibn Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him

Explanation of Rule 2: العبرة في العقود بالمقاصد والمعاني لا بالألفاظ والمباني.

This rule is derived from the first rule, and it means that in contracts, consideration is given to the intentions indicated by the circumstances and evidence present in a contract where the parties may have used terms that result in the effects of a specific contract. However, the evidence indicates that their intention was directed towards the ruling of another contract; thus, the provisions of that contract apply to it. This is because what is considered is the shared intention of the contracting parties as indicated by the circumstances of their agreement. An example of this is a gift that conceals a contract of sale; the contract is subject to the provisions of sale even if it is named a gift. It goes without saying that the intentions referred to in this rule are those indicated by the circumstances of the contract, not those hidden within the parties' minds without any indication.

Explanation of Rule 3: العادة مُحكمة.

The custom and usage mentioned in this rule and the following general rules have the same meaning; as the system adhered to the most common formulations of the rules. The term "custom" or "usage" in these rules includes the established usage among people, which is the repeated matter that people have become accustomed to and which has stabilized in their dealings with each other. It may be general among people or specific to a certain group or region, and it also includes the ongoing custom between two parties even if it is not a general or specific usage. The meaning of "decided" is that it has been adjudicated, so it is referred to in case of dispute, and specific usage takes precedence over general usage, just as the ongoing custom between two parties takes precedence over usage. To refer to custom or usage, it is required that: A- It must be consistent and established. B- It must coincide with the incident, not preceding or following it. C- It must not be prohibited by a statutory provision. D- The contracting parties must not have agreed otherwise. Referring to usage is considered in many matters; such as delivery, fraud, defect, what is considered essential and what is not, periods for which no term has been agreed upon, and other matters.

Explanation of Rule 4: التعيين بالعرف كالتعيين بالنص.

This rule is derived from the third rule; it clarifies that designation by custom, which includes the prevailing practice between two parties, takes the same binding status as the designation stipulated in its absence. This designation in this rule includes the designation of the place, duration, the contracting party, or anything else that can be designated by a text. For the rule to be applied, the conditions of custom previously stated in the third rule must be met, including that the contracting parties have not agreed otherwise, and that it is not prohibited by a statutory text.

Explanation of Rule 5: المعروف عرفا كالمشروط شرطًا.

This rule is derived from the third rule; it clarified that what is customary in obligations in contracts, including what is customary between the contracting parties, holds the same power as if it were stipulated in the contract, provided that the conditions for adopting custom, previously explained in the clarification of that rule, are met. This is considered an implicit agreement between the contracting parties, sourced from the custom or prevailing practice between them, even if it is not explicitly stated in the contract. In application of this rule, the system has established that if the term of agreement in the statutory text is not restricted to being explicit between the contracting parties, then the ruling of that text includes both explicit and implicit agreements based on custom or prevailing practice between the contracting parties. This includes instances where the statutory text is restricted by the phrase "unless otherwise agreed," which encompasses implicit agreements based on custom or prevailing practice between the contracting parties, taking into account the conditions for adopting custom previously explained in the third rule, without the need to explicitly mention custom in every instance, relying on what this rule has established; and what Article (33) of this system has established, that the expression of the contracting party's will can be explicit or implicit, as the prevalence of custom or the contracting parties' practice on a certain matter is considered an implicit agreement between them to adopt it unless they explicitly state otherwise.

Explanation of Rule 6: الممتنع عادة كالممتنع حقيقة.

The truly impossible is that which cannot occur, and the usually impossible is that which is not known to occur, even if there is a remote intellectual possibility; it takes the ruling of the truly impossible. This includes issues where the ruling is contingent upon the impossibility of something, such as the lapse of rescission due to a defect if the buyer has established a right for another on the sold item that does not remove it from his ownership and it is impossible to release it within a reasonable period, and the permissibility of settlement even if the right included is unknown, provided that the ignorance does not prevent delivery and it is impossible to ascertain it within a short period, among other issues.

Explanation of Rule 7: اليقين لا يزول بالشك.

This is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and it means that a certain matter, which is without doubt, is not nullified merely by the emergence of doubt, which is a probable matter; because the weaker cannot nullify what is stronger than it. The predominant assumption that is close to certainty takes its ruling. This principle encompasses many branches, including the principles of presumption of continuity as will be explained.

Explanation of Rule 8: الأصل بقاء ما كان على ما كان.

This rule is derived from the principle "certainty is not overruled by doubt," and the original here refers to maintaining the status of a matter from the past to the present until something arises that nullifies the original ruling. For example, the original status of a thing is its remaining in the ownership of its owner until proven otherwise, and the original status of a contract is its continuation until its termination is proven.

Explanation of Rule 9: الأصل براءة الذمة.

This rule is derived from the principle "certainty is not removed by doubt," and it establishes that a person's liability is free from any obligation towards others until proven otherwise by virtue of a contract, a unilateral obligation, a harmful act, unjust enrichment, or the system. If the obligation is proven to a certain extent, the person's liability is considered clear of any excess until proven otherwise.

Explanation of Rule 10: الأصل في العقود والشروط الصحة واللزوم.

This rule establishes an important principle in contracts, which is that the default is the freedom to contract; it is not required for the contract to follow a specific form, whether it is a single contract or composed of multiple contracts. The contracting parties may agree on terms they find acceptable, and these terms are valid and binding for them, even if such terms are not explicitly stated as valid in the system. This rule is based on the words of Allah Almighty: {O you who have believed, fulfill [all] contracts} (16), as the noble verse indicates the general obligation to fulfill the contract and the commitments it includes. The only exceptions to the general rule are contracts or terms that the system deems void; by virtue of a statutory text that prohibits it or due to its violation of public order, such as gambling contracts and terms prohibited by the system to protect the stability of transactions, like prohibiting agreements contrary to what the system has decided in general exceptional circumstances. Other than that, it is valid and binding for the contracting parties.

Explanation of Rule 11: التصرف على الرعية منوط بالمصلحة.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and it means that any action taken by the ruler or those in equivalent positions among state officials concerning a public matter must aim to achieve the public interest. The ruler is not permitted to act by virtue of his authority except in accordance with the requirements of the public interest and as dictated by the balance between benefits and harms. If there is a public interest accompanied by a specific harm, the consideration is given to the public interest, and the specific harm is disregarded. The basis of this rule is the saying of the Prophet, peace be upon him: "Each of you is a shepherd, and each of you is responsible for his flock." This includes situations where the system has restricted the ruler's authority in assessing certain matters or where he has discretionary power; he must adhere to the public interest in his actions and is not allowed to show favoritism or fulfill personal desires that do not align with the public interest.

Explanation of Rule 12: الخراج بالضمان.

Kharaaj is the yield that belongs to the thing, and guarantee is the liability for the destruction of the thing. This principle pertains to the rights and obligations of the owner in contracts of exchange; whoever has the gain bears the loss, and whoever has the yield bears the liability for destruction. For instance, the buyer of real estate is entitled to its yield and growth from the time of taking possession, even if the price has not been paid, and bears the liability for its destruction. This principle applies to cases where the buyer benefits from the sold item before taking possession if it has a yield; such as the rent collected if he sells it and then rents it from the buyer. The heirs are entitled to the yield and growth of the estate from the date of their ancestor's death, and they bear the liability for its destruction.

Explanation of Rule 13: الغُنم بالغُرم.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that whoever has the benefit of something; has its utility and its yield and growth, then he bears its liability; which is its harm and the consequence of its destruction. This is indicated by a number of legal texts, including the saying of the Prophet, peace be upon him: (The yield is by the liability), and it is similar in meaning to the twelfth principle, and it serves as clarification and emphasis on what was stated in it.

Explanation of Rule 14: التابع تابع.

The meaning of this rule is that the subordinate does not have an independent ruling, and it has many branches, including that the subordinate follows the principal in its validity and invalidity, and in its obligation and non-obligation. Thus, the branch of a tree follows its origin in ruling. This includes the subordination of the benefits of the sold item to its ownership. Consequently, the owner's actions affect the original item and what follows it. What is considered subordinate to the item follows it in sale and other transactions, even if its subordination is not explicitly mentioned. This includes the subordination of defects in the sold item and the transactions related to its origin. Examples of the branches of this rule include that the sale of land includes crops that have not yet matured, the sale of furniture includes the keys to the cabinets, the sale of an orchard includes its trees, and the sale of an animal includes what it carries.

Explanation of Rule 15: إذا سقط الأصل سقط الفرع.

This rule is derived from the fourteenth rule; it states that if the principal, which is the followed, falls, then the subsidiary, which is the follower, also falls. For example, the annulment of a sale includes the fall of benefits, and the fall of a mortgage upon the expiration of the obligation secured by it.

Explanation of Rule 16: الضرورة تُقدر بقدرها.

Among the major jurisprudential principles is the notion that what is permissible to do out of necessity is determined by the extent of that necessity without exceeding it; because necessity does not nullify rights, but rather permits the doing of what is religiously prohibited to the extent of the necessity, and such an act may be harmful. An example of this is the possessory pledge, which the system acknowledges as obligating the pledgor to enable the pledgee to possess the pledged item, resulting in rights for the pledgee to sell the pledged item and satisfy the debt from its proceeds. Another example is that depositing an item with a third party as a trust, if the depositary has an interest in the deposit, obligates them to preserve it.

Explanation of Rule 17: الضرورات تبيح المحظورات.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that compelling needs that a person cannot avoid permit him to commit actions that were originally prohibited, and the sin is lifted from the perpetrator. The meaning of necessities includes general needs that affect all people; for instance, if a person is forced to exceed regulatory limits in his actions to avert an imminent danger to himself or others, or if he is compelled to perform actions not permitted by the system under normal circumstances to preserve himself, his property, or others. The application of this rule requires the following conditions: A- The necessity must be compelling. B- There must be no alternative to address the necessity except by committing the prohibited act. C- Committing the prohibited act must remove or avert the harm.

Explanation of Rule 18: الضرر لا يزال بمثله.

This rule is derived from the rule "Harm is to be removed" that follows, and this rule stipulates that the removal of harm must be done in ways that do not result in equal or greater harm; it is removed by something that eliminates the harm. If the harm is equal or greater, it is not removed, but the original harm remains. For example, the possessory pledge, which the system acknowledges as obligating the pledgor to enable the pledgee to possess the pledged item, results in rights for the pledgee to sell the pledged item and satisfy the debt from its proceeds.

Explanation of Rule 19: الضرر لا يكون قديماً.

This rule establishes that damage is not ancient, unlike other matters such as custom, or something fixed in ownership, and the like. It means that damage is not old enough to establish a right, but rather it must be removed. If damage is proven, it does not become time-barred. Therefore, anyone who is harmed by the action of another person has the right to demand the removal of the damage, even if a long time has passed. This does not contradict what is stated in this system regarding the periods after which a claim is not heard, as it pertains to new damage that was not previously known.

Explanation of Rule 20: الضرر يزال.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and it establishes that all harm must be removed and eliminated. This is supported by several religious texts, including the saying of the Prophet, peace be upon him: "There should be neither harm nor reciprocating harm" (17). Harm is what causes a person injury or a reduction in their rights. The system does not differentiate in removing harm whether it is old or new, general or specific. Harm includes both material and moral damage, as well as actual and potential harm for which there is strong evidence of occurrence. It includes harm caused by a person's actions or by direct consequence of their actions, such as environmental pollution. It may also be due to a person's failure to perform their duties, such as leaving a road wet without necessity. It includes damages to the self, property, honor, or otherwise.

Explanation of Rule 21: الولايات تُقبل بالرأي لا بالهوى.

This rule is derived from the principle "actions concerning the subjects are contingent upon their welfare," meaning that all authorities in the state are subject to the principle of public interest. Thus, anyone who assumes a position in the state must consider the public interest in their actions and decisions, ensuring that these actions and decisions are based on sound judgment supported by the available data, and not on personal whims or inclinations towards private interests. This rule applies to anyone who holds a public or private authority, such as a guardian, custodian, or overseer, among others. For instance, a custodian must consider the interest of the minor in all actions related to them, and a guardian must consider the interest of the ward in all their actions, ensuring they are based on sound judgment and not personal whims.

Explanation of Rule 22: المباشر ضامن ولو لم يتعمد.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that whoever performs an act by himself, or directly, is liable for any resulting damage, even if it was not intentional. For example, a doctor who performs a surgical operation that results in damage is liable for this damage, even if it was not intentional. Similarly, an owner who constructs a building that results in damage is liable for this damage, even if it was not intentional. Exceptions to this include cases where there is another cause for the damage, an act of God, or a cause beyond one's control.

Explanation of Rule 23: المتسبب لا يضمن إلا بالتعمد أو التعدي.

This rule is derived from the twenty-second rule, and its meaning is that whoever causes damage is not liable unless they intentionally caused the damage or acted with transgression. If there was no intention and no transgression in their action, they are not liable. For example, if someone digs a well on their property and a person passes by and falls into it, they are not liable unless they intentionally caused the damage or acted with transgression, such as digging the well in a public place or in a private place and leaving it open without supervision.

Explanation of Rule 24: إذا اجتمع المباشر والمتسبب؛ أضيف الحكم إلى المباشر.

This rule is derived from the twenty-second and twenty-third rules, and its meaning is that if a direct act and a causative act occur together, the judgment is attributed to the direct actor, who is the guarantor, and the causative actor is not considered. For example, if someone throws a stone on a path, and a person passes by, trips, and falls, the one who falls is guaranteed, and the one who threw the stone is not considered. However, if the causative actor intentionally causes harm, or if there is transgression in his act, he is liable along with the direct actor.

Explanation of Rule 25: الجواز الشرعي ينافي الضمان.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and it means that whoever does something permissible by Sharia; they are not liable for any harm resulting from their action. For example, if someone sells a commodity and it results in harm to the buyer, they are not liable for this harm unless there is fraud or deception on their part, and the sale must be permissible by Sharia. This rule applies to all contracts and transactions that are permissible by Sharia.

Explanation of Rule 26: ما لا يتم الواجب إلا به فهو واجب.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that whatever serves as a means to an obligation is itself obligatory. For instance, performing prayer is obligatory, and ablution is a means to perform prayer, thus it becomes obligatory. This rule applies to all religious obligations, including statutory obligations. For example, a person must adhere to the regulations and instructions issued by governmental authorities, and these commitments should serve as a means to achieve the public interest.

Explanation of Rule 27: درء المفاسد مقدم على جلب المصالح.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that preventing harm and eliminating corruption takes precedence over bringing benefits and achieving interests. For example, removing environmental damage takes precedence over the economic benefits resulting from activities that cause such damage. This rule applies to all matters related to interests and corruptions, including regulatory issues.

Explanation of Rule 28: يُغتفر في التوابع ما لا يُغتفر في غيرها.

This rule is derived from the fourteenth rule, and its meaning is that the dependent, which does not have an independent judgment, is excused in matters that are not excused in others. For example, minor defects in the sold item that do not affect its value or prevent its use are excused and do not give rise to an option for the buyer. This rule applies to all dependents in contracts and transactions, including dependents in funds and dependents in real estate.

Explanation of Rule 29: إذا تعارض المانع والمقتضي؛ يُقدم المانع.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that if there is a conflict between what prevents an action and what necessitates it, the preventing factor takes precedence. For example, if someone has a hindrance to performing prayer, the hindrance is prioritized, and the prayer is not performed. This rule applies to all issues related to hindrances and necessities, including regulatory matters. For instance, if someone has a hindrance to concluding a contract, the hindrance takes precedence, and the contract is not concluded.

Explanation of Rule 30: التابع لا يتقدم على المتبوع.

This rule is derived from the fourteenth rule, and its meaning is that the subordinate does not precede the principal. For example, the branch does not precede the origin in inheritance, and the executor does not precede the guardian in managing the minor's property. This rule applies to all matters related to the subordinate and the principal, including regulatory matters. For instance, the branch does not precede the origin in claiming rights and fulfilling obligations.

Explanation of Rule 31: التابع لا يستقل بالفسخ.

This rule is derived from the fourteenth rule, and its meaning is that the subordinate cannot independently annul the contract. For example, the branch cannot independently annul the contract concluded by the principal, and the guardian cannot independently annul the contract concluded by the custodian. This rule applies to all matters related to the subordinate and the principal, including regulatory matters. For instance, the branch cannot independently annul the contract concluded by the principal, and the guardian cannot independently annul the contract concluded by the custodian.

Explanation of Rule 32: الرضا ببعض الشيء رضا بكله.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that whoever consents to part of something is considered to have consented to all of it. For example, if someone agrees to some of the terms of a contract, they are deemed to have agreed to all its terms. This rule applies to all matters related to consent, including regulatory matters. For instance, if someone agrees to some provisions of a system, they are considered to have agreed to all its provisions.

Explanation of Rule 33: الجهالة لا تمنع العلم.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that the ignorance of something does not prevent knowledge of it. For example, the ignorance of the amount of debt does not prevent knowledge of it. This rule is applied to all issues related to ignorance, including regulatory issues. For instance, the ignorance of the extent of damage does not prevent knowledge of it.

Explanation of Rule 34: ما جاز لضرورة يقدر بقدرها.

This rule is derived from the sixteenth rule, and its meaning is that what is permissible to do due to necessity is determined by the extent of this necessity without exceeding it; because necessity does not nullify rights, but rather permits doing what is religiously prohibited to the extent of the necessity. This act may be harmful, such as the possessory pledge approved by the system, which obligates the pledgor to enable the pledgee to possess the pledged item and results in rights for the pledgee to sell the pledged item and satisfy the debt from its price. Another example is depositing an item with a third party as a trust; if the depositary has an interest in the deposit, they are obligated to preserve it.

Explanation of Rule 35: الممنوع شرعاً كالممنوع حقيقة.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that what is prohibited by Sharia is considered as truly prohibited. For example, usurious sales are prohibited by Sharia, thus they are considered truly prohibited. This rule applies to all matters related to what is prohibited by Sharia, including regulatory matters. For instance, what is prohibited by regulation is considered as truly prohibited.

Explanation of Rule 36: الظاهر حجة شرعاً.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that the apparent, which is not contradicted by evidence, is considered a legal proof. For instance, the apparent validity of contracts is considered a legal proof. This rule applies to all matters related to appearances, including regulatory matters. For example, the apparent validity of documents is considered a legal proof.

Explanation of Rule 37: المباشر مع المتسبب لا يضمن إلا بالتعمد أو التعدي.

Explanation of Rule 38: الرجوع في المبيع لا يُوجب الغرم.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that the seller's return of the sold item does not obligate him to incur a loss. For instance, if the seller returns the sold item due to a defect in it, he is not obligated to incur a loss. This rule applies to all matters related to the return of the sold item, including regulatory matters. For example, the return of real estate does not obligate a loss.

Explanation of Rule 39: إذا تعذر الأصل يُصار إلى البدل.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that when the original is impossible, recourse is made to the substitute. For example, if someone is unable to fulfill a debt in kind, recourse is made to the substitute. This rule applies to all matters related to the impossibility of the original, including regulatory issues. For instance, if someone is unable to execute an obligation in kind, recourse is made to the substitute.

Explanation of Rule 40: من سعى في نقض ما تم من جهته؛ فسعيه مردود عليه.

The rule means that whoever undertakes an action by their own will and choice, and then wishes to revoke what has been done without an excuse, their effort will not be accepted, but rather their effort will be rejected. For example, if someone enters into a contract by their own will and choice, and then wishes to revoke the contract without an excuse, their effort will not be accepted, but rather their effort will be rejected. This rule applies to all matters related to revoking what has been done, including regulatory matters.

Explanation of Rule 41: الجهالة لا تمنع العلم بالقدر.

This rule is one of the major jurisprudential principles, and its meaning is that ignorance of the quantity of something does not prevent knowledge of it. For example, ignorance of the amount of debt does not prevent knowledge of it. This rule is applied to all issues related to ignorance, including regulatory issues. For instance, ignorance of the extent of damage does not prevent knowledge of it.