Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: The contract between pl and def states that pl will reimburse def for damages he sustained, including if def has to pay others due to pl’s negligence. The question is whether pl was negligent regarding the etrogim. First, pl claims that the agreement with oo was not carried out because Mr. S decided to raise the quality of the etrogim he wanted for CP, and this caused the need for a change in quantity. Def claims it was because oo was concerned that too big an order was being made and that CP would not pay oo in full. [We will discuss next time the partiality of the different witnesses on this matter.]
Was it necessary for there to be a contract between pl and oo? Pl said that the AM market is one based on trust between the major players, and there are rarely contracts. One of several indications that this is the case is the fact that Mr. S, upon making a new agreement between CP and oo, did not bother to write a proper contract but to sign on some numbers on a scrap of paper after a week.
Regarding the lack of pl’s presence, the contract does not state that pl needed to be present but could have someone representing him. Since oo was serving on pl’s behalf to provide the etrogim for def, he fulfilled that requirement. Although a representative of def asked pl to come, he was not required to agree, which is even more understandable according to his claim that a family situation arose that required his immediate attention.
P'ninat Mishpat (812)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
617 - The Mouse Guarding the Cheese? – part II
618 - Why Was the Etrog Order Changed? – part
619 - Why Was the Etrog Order Changed? – part II
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
Limits of Interest Rate for Loan with Heter Iska – part I
based on ruling 80033 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Sivan 8 5782
P'ninat Mishpat: Multiple Agreements and Parties – part IV
based on final ruling of 80082 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Tevet 5786
Profits from Formerly Joint Swimming Pool – part
(based on ruling 81110 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
19 Sivan 5784
Improving Education in Yafo
Igrot Hare’aya Letter #21
Iyar 21 5781
P'ninat Mishpat: Problematic Lights?
based on appeal of ruling 84085 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Cheshvan 5786
P'ninat Mishpat: Can the Tenant Take Off for Theft?
based on ruling 85035 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Iyar 5784
P'ninat Mishpat: Using Car that Was Supposed to be Returned
based on ruling 84065 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Av 5785
