Is a person obligated to provide financial compensation if the conditions of error, harm, and the causal link between them are met, such that if one condition is not met, they are not obligated to do so? And is error the omission of what must be done or the commission of what must be omitted?

The conditions mentioned for entitlement to compensation in man-made laws—namely: the existence of damage, error, and a causal relationship between them, and notifying the debtor—originate from Western laws and differ partially or completely from what is in Islamic Sharia. Error in jurisprudence means unintentionality, while legal experts define it as negligence and dereliction. Compensation in Sharia does not always necessitate the occurrence of damage; permissible destruction does not obligate compensation unless it results in a right for another, whereas impermissible destruction incurs compensation. Causation may be realized without the obligation of guarantee in Sharia, as in some of the examples mentioned. Similarly, regarding animals damaging crops, jurists differentiate between what they damage by day or by night concerning the obligation of guarantee.