- Sections
- P'ninat Mishpat
28
Ruling: We will deal with different issues each week of presentation.
The claim that pl’s mother owns the apartment – that is not something we can incorporate into this decision. Pl’s mother did not join these proceedings as a litigant, and therefore her claims (or her son’s claims in her name) are not able to be considered. Additionally, we have not been shown any documentation that indicates the claim is true, and pl himself has acted as if he owns the property. Finally, that matter was already presented to the courts. If the courts did not place a restraining order on the sale of the apartment, which a different court already approved, we do not have grounds to disqualify the purchase. Of course, if the courts ever accept the claim that pl’s mother is the true owner, the basis for the sale by Hotza’ah Lapo’al will presumably be undone.
The claim that def agreed to undo the sale – If one orally agrees to a sale without an act of kinyan and then backs out, there is a grievance against him known as mechusarei amana (lacking credibility) (Choshen Mishpat 204:7). However, that is a moral claim, not one that beit din enforces (Shut Ra’anach 118). Furthermore, def claims with confidence that he only said that he would consider if it could be done. If that is the case, and pl did not bring any evidence that it is not, then there is not even an oral agreement on this matter, and these are not grounds for even a moral obligation.
Pl claimed that by def giving the impression he would agree to undo the sale, he prevented pl from bringing his new offer to the koness nechasim (appointee of the court for bankruptcy cases). There is no evidence and little logic that the koness nechasim would have acted differently after the courts finalized the sale to def, according to his recommendation. Additionally, there is no evidence that def deceived pl. Even if these things would have occurred, such damage would be no more than gerama (indirect causation) and not grounds for action by beit din in this case.

P'ninat Mishpat (771)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
667 - Judging Someone who Refuses to Appear before Court
668 - Did the Owner Exhaust his Opportunities? – part I
669 - Did the Owner Exhaust his Opportunities? – part II
Load More

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

A Landlord's Responsibility
Various Rabbis | 17 Shvat 5768

When a Couple Both Want the House After Divorce
Various Rabbis | 4 Elul 5767

P'ninat Mishpat: Questions of Changing Work Orders
based on ruling 79044 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Shevat 5784

Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit

Profits from Formerly Joint Swimming Pool – part
(based on ruling 81110 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
19 Sivan 5784

Halachic Shmita Guide from Eretz Hemdah
Elul 8 5781

Connecting Disciplines in Torah Study
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook #103 – part II
Sivan 8 5782

Limits of Interest Rate for Loan with Heter Iska – part II
based on ruling 80033 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Sivan 15 5782

How Are Tefillin Manufactured A Tefillin Shoppers Guide
Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff | 5768
The Principles of Hagala
Chapter Ten-Part Three
Rabbi Eliezer Melamed | 5775

The War of the Kings and its Significance
Parashat Lech Lecha
Rabbi David Dov Levanon | 5762

The Kedusha of Am Yisrael and Eretz Yisrael
Rabbi Ari Shvat | Iyar 16 5780

Orchot Tzaddikim class 56, "Stay Quiet" i
Rabbi Ari Shvat | Nisan 5785
Daf Yomi Makkot Daf 12
R' Eli Stefansky | 22 Nisan 5785

The Solution to 'Risky' Intellectual Topics
Ayn Aya, Shabbat v, 72
Rabbi Ari Shvat | Nisan 5785
