- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
49
Case: The plaintiff (=pl) hired his friend, the defendant (=def), a part-time sofer, to write a sefer Torah. The contract states a price of 130,000 shekels plus VAT and says that the writing will be mehudar. It also states that pl saw samples of defโs writing and that pl has the right to demand the switching of sections of lower levels of quality without charge, as long as Rabbi X agrees this is appropriate. Toward the end of the writing, after pl paid 113,780 shekels, pl experienced financial problems, looked to sell the sefer Torah, and asked for two sections to show to merchants. Several experts told him that the sefer would be worth, when finished, 70-80,000 shekels. Def presented a letter, from an expert with whom he is connected, saying that the writing is proper. Pl also sent def an email during the process in which he praised defโs work. Originally, pl asked either: 1) receiving a completed kosher sefer and a return of the money above the 80,000 shekel it is worth, or 2) employing mekach taโut (invalid purchase) and a return of all the money. Def argues that the sefer Torah is fine and worth the price and that, in any case, any kosher sefer is defined as mehudar. Also, since pl saw the work before agreeing and could have had the written sections checked all along, it is too late to claim mekach taโut. Also, a major reason that pl chose def is that he considers def a tzaddik, and this has not changed.
Ruling: In order to preserve the relationship between the two friends, beit din recommended the following compromise. Pl would receive the incomplete sefer Torah, have someone finish it (including checks and fixing), and let def keep 77,000 shekels plus VAT. Def rejected the offer.

P'ninat Mishpat (781)
Various Rabbis
537 - Extent of Guarantee
538 - Dissatisfaction with the Quality of a Sefer Torah โ Part I
539 - Dissatisfaction with the Quality of a Sefer Torah โ Part II
Load More
Since the parlance of the average person distinguishes between a kosher sefer Torah and a mehudar one, this is like a case of claiming to sell good produce and giving bad produce, in which case there is mekach taโut. This is apparent from the contract as well, which talks about replacing sections that are not considered mehudar, which is obvious if not mehudar means not kosher.
Additionally, since the expert estimated the value at 90,000 shekels, which is more than a sixth off of the 130,000 that def was promised and still demands, the mispricing is also grounds for mekach taโut (Shulchan Aruch ibid.).
Next time we will look at the question of plโs acceptance of the quality.

P'ninat Mishpat: A Used Car with a Tendency for Engine Problems
based on ruling 84034 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Iyar 5784

P'ninat Mishpat: Normalizing an Agreement that Becomes Absurd
based on ruling 83069 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Sivan 5785

P'ninat Mishpat: Proof Needed to Remove a Squatter โ part II
based on ruling 81116 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Cheshvan 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

Shmita
Parashat Behar
Rabbi Stewart Weiss | 5764

Presence of Hashem in the Mind of a Sinner
Various Rabbis | 5773

Dispute over Sales Price and Product Quality
part I
Various Rabbis | 5572
