Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: On the matter of the sale of the product, beit din fundamentally agrees with pl1. The product was received to be sold before the agreement and its profits were earmarked for distribution. Since it is not a matter of being paid for work after the work is over but realizing an anticipated profit, pl1 is deserving. However, def2’s claims that storage fees are to be reduced from the profits is correct because pl1 did not prove that the delay in the sale was done in bad faith.
Regarding the continued profit sharing after the 2014 agreement, it is necessary to analyze pl1’s claims. First it is noteworthy that pl1’s options in def2 were in the case that it was sold or pl1 was fired. Pl1 explained that he was interested in separating from def2 because he was unhappy in the way it was being run, and that a process had started by which some of def2’s clients were being transferred to pl2, a subsidiary owned by pl1, and thereby his profits were to be made in that way. Even if, as pl1 claimed, he would in the meantime continue to receive operating profits from def2, it would make sense only that this would be as a worker and not as a partner in def2, from which he was separating. This is evidenced by the division of profits not being based on the percentage in stock options. Therefore, pl1 would not, after the 2014 agreement, be able to receive half of the value of def2. Even if this understanding were not clear, the burden of proof is on pl1. This is because def1 was the original owner of def2, and he is still listed in the company registry as its sole owner. While pl1 has an explanation as to why he did not want to be listed, he still has the burden of proof that the agreements should be understood in the manner he claims.
P'ninat Mishpat (835)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
657 - Aftermath of a Complex Partnership – part II
658 - Aftermath of a Complex Partnership – part III
659 - Appeal of an Incomplete Ruling
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
Igrot Hare’aya Connecting Disciplines in Torah Study
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook 103 – part III
P'ninat Mishpat A Commercial Rental for a Closed Business – part II
based on ruling 80047 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat Limits of Interest Rate for Loan with Heter Iska – part II
based on ruling 80033 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Igrot Hare’aya Trying to Arrange Purchase of Land in Eretz Yisrael – part II
#229 Date and Place: 13 Tishrei 5670 (1909), Yafo
P'ninat Mishpat P'NINAT MISHPAT: A Mess of Loans, Repayments and Grievances – part II
based on ruling 83033 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Realtor’s Fee on Large Commercial Building – part I
(based on ruling 85031 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
Rabbis in Midrash
Lessons
fast navigation
Various Events FOR WHOM NOT TO VOTE
Rav Zvi Yehuda Kook stressed that Israeli politics is G-dly, so I have no problem answering this common question on a Torani blog. Also, Free-Will is a G-d-given right and obligation, to "destine one's fate" (R. Soloveichik, Kol Dodi Dofek, 67), so I obviously don't tell others how to vote. But once not a few (especially young) have already asked, a couple of personal words from experience and thoughts from chazal & Rav Kook which may be of help to others, mainly for whom NOT to vote.
P'ninat Mishpat Fallout from Failure to Install Elevator – part II
based on ruling 85007 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
