- Sections
- P'ninat Mishpat
The Torah study is dedicatedin the memory of
Yossef ben Simcha
707
Rishonim dispute how a kinyan prevents the sides from backing out of their agreement. The Nimukei Yosef (Sanhedrin 4b in the pages of the Rif) posits that the kinyan is not of a directly monetary nature, but comes to concretize the procedural agreement. The Ra'avan says that the litigants must make a kinyan on the money in dispute to be paid according to the decision.
Rishonim explain that not only regarding the viability of witnesses and dayanim but in regard to a variety of rules of adjudication, the sides can alter the regular rules. These include beginning deliberations at night, using translators, etc. These changes are not limited to technical issues or matters of a specific Torah preference but apply as well to matters of serious content that could easily affect the case’s outcome. For example, a sinner as a witness is suspected of lying for financial gain, yet he can testify if so agreed. The use of translators also can hinder the dayanim’s ability to understand and interrogate the litigants. (One area where agreement is invalid is about going to adjudicate under the auspices of a secular court.) The reason that these agreements are accepted is that since the goal is to resolve arguments between the parties, there is little reason to prevent people from using a framework with which they are satisfied.
Regarding present day practice, the signing of an arbitration agreement is deemed to be a form of kinyan to the agreements between the sides based on the rule of situmta (whatever is considered binding by society becomes halachically so). That is why special rules that a given beit din employs that are referred to in the arbitration agreement are binding. It is common now, for example, to allow adjudication to take place at night. Regarding matters of content, many batei din receive authority to extract money even when there is a (minority) opinion that payment should not be made. Sometimes the law of the land is accepted relatively broadly. It is possible to validate a ruling, even if it ends up being based on a mistake, or to allow the dayanim to rule either based on strict law or based on compromise. Examples of rulings where this was employed can be found in editions 26-27 of Halacha P'suka.

P'ninat Mishpat (773)
Various Rabbis
145 - Validity of a Get When a Father’s Name Was Incorrect
146 - Litigants' Agreement to Special Rules of Adjudication
147 - An Unspecified Obligation Following a Specific One
Load More

P'ninat Mishpat: Upper Property’s Responsibility for Flooding
based on ruling 82008 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Adar 5784

P'ninat Mishpat: Unsuccessful Transfer of Yeshiva – part II
based on ruling 82138 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Adar 5784

P'ninat Mishpat: Unsuccessful Transfer of Yeshiva – part III
based on ruling 82138 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Nisan 5784

P'ninat Mishpat: How Far Does a Lien Go?
based on ruling 83097 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Shevat 5784
Days on Which Tachanun Is Not Recited
Chapter Twenty One-Part Three
Rabbi Eliezer Melamed | 5775
Pesukei d’Zimrah
Chapter fourteen-part one
Rabbi Eliezer Melamed | 5775

Why Wasn’t the Plague of Blood Enough?
Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Rimon | 5778

Understanding the Prohibition of Avodah Zarah
Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff | Av 26 5777

Even the Wise Shouldn't Skip Stages
Ayn Aya Shabbat v, 78
Rabbi Ari Shvat | Iyar 5785
Daf Yomi Shevuot Daf 11
R' Eli Stefansky | 14 Iyar 5785
Daf Yomi Shevuot Daf 8
R' Eli Stefansky | 11 Iyar 5785
