The rules of jurisprudence (the impediment and the imperative) are its branches, meaning and evidence applied to the impediment whose existence requires the absence of others in Islamic Sharia and Sudanese law

The jurisprudence (Fiqh) rules (the impediment and the requirement) mean: that what is permissible because of a reason then the reason ceases to invalidate the ruling, and for example: eating of dead meat, treating uncleanliness, coercion to utter the word unbelief, and the necessity of permissibility of lying and swearing against it due to necessity and stealing the money of others, and these prohibitions are permitted in the case of necessity.
An impediment is everything that its existence requires the negation of another. In this way, the impediment is the opposite of the condition whose existence requires the existence of another, and its nonexistence is the absence of another.
An example of an impediment whose existence requires no other is the debt owed to the deceased, and the debt is: a specific contract and the payment of money like this to another.
The debt on the deceased was considered an obstacle to the inheritance, so if the heirs paid the debt of their deceased legator, their right to the inheritance returned.
Among the branches of the jurisprudence rules (the impediment and the requirement), what is permitted by an excuse that invalidates its demise, and its examples: the stone against the foolish, and from its branches also: if the impediment and the requirement conflict, the impediment is presented
The research included two subjects, the first topic: the concept of jurisprudence rules (the impediment and the requirement), and their evidence, the second topic: the applications of the jurisprudential rules (the impediment and the requirement), the impediment whose existence is the absence of others, such as the debt of the deceased, the will to an heir, and knowledge of the old defect in the sale, And the jurisprudential rules that branch from them, then a comparison was made in these applications with the Sudanese law.
The conclusion contained recommendations and results, including:
1- It is permissible to forcibly eat food from its owner after guaranteeing it to ward off destruction.
2- If the requirement and the impediment are equal, the impediment shall take precedence over the requirement.
3- If the requirement exceeds the impediment, the obligatory shall be given precedence.
Recommendations: Take care of forbidden things because Islamic Sharia is concerned with prohibitions on commands.