A Jurisprudential and Legal Analysis of Keeping Animals in Apartments with a Comparative Approach to the Laws of Other Countries
Subject Areas : Private law
1 - Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
Keywords: keeping animals, shared spaces in apartments, private units in apartments, principle of taslīt, principle of no-harm,
Abstract :
One of the recurring challenges of social life is the conflict of interests among individuals. Every person, in seeking to exercise their rights—including property rights—may act in ways that inadvertently infringe upon the rights of others. A clear contemporary example of such conflict is the growing disputes among residents of apartment complexes regarding the keeping of animals within their private residential units. The root of these disagreements can be traced back to two foundational jurisprudential principles: the principle of taslīt (the owner’s dominion over property) and the principle of no-harm (lā ḍarar). Animal owners invoke the principle of taslīt to justify the legitimacy of keeping pets in their homes, whereas neighbors argue that no individual may exercise proprietary rights in a manner that causes harm or disturbance to others, thereby appealing to the principle of no-harm. In shared or common areas of an apartment building, this conflict rarely escalates because existing legal rules and cooperative norms typically enable residents to coexist peacefully. However, in private units, disagreements become more evident and have even led to divergent views among jurists and legal scholars regarding which principle should take precedence. The central question is whether the right belongs to the animal owner or whether the neighbor’s right to be free from harm prevails. The present article, through a detailed and research-oriented approach, examines classical and contemporary jurisprudential opinions as well as existing statutory rules to provide a rational and balanced resolution to these conflicts. Solutions are proposed that allow each party to enjoy their rightful benefits without infringing upon the rights of others, ensuring that such conflicts of interest can be effectively avoided.
