Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: [Last time we saw that def deserves to be paid, but according to the second agreement, only 30,000 NIS.]
Regarding the lack of signature on scag, pl said that def had written the agreement and had confirmed by email that it was binding. Def contradicted herself on whether she had written it and what it represented. If we are to say that def did not lie about scag, the apparent explanation is the following. Def was willing to forgo the 15,000 NIS already due to her only based on an understanding that pl would continue to employ her (which could later lead to additional payment). When pl fired her, she removed the idea of a discount from her mind. In any case, scag is binding, as there was no need to sign on it or make a kinyan, which is unnecessary for waiving money due (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 12:8). By writing and sending the agreement, def showed that she forwent the 15,000 NIS.
Regarding the father’s waiver of claims, he explained that he was forced into it in order to get the documentation, but that he had in mind that he did not have claims, not that his daughter did not have claims to have money returned. We note that the document the father signed is titled "Certification of Receiving the File" and that it is possible to explain that the lack of claims has to do with complaints about the documents received or def’s performance of her job. It did not necessarily mean that pl could not demand return of money that was overpaid. In fact, the power of attorney that pl gave her father does not appear to be beyond authority to pick up the documentation, so that he did not have authority to waive all rights. Thus, for multiple reasons the father did not preclude pl from receiving the 15,000 NIS due back to her.
P'ninat Mishpat (835)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
700 - How Much Pay for the Fired Lawyer? – part I
701 - How Much Pay for the Fired Lawyer?
702 - A Request for Turkish Protection
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
P'ninat Mishpat Payments after a Gradual End of Employment
(Based on ruling 82024 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Igrot Hare’aya Departure of an Uncle to Eretz Yisrael
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook: Vol. I, #1 , p. 1-2 – part II
P'ninat Mishpat Repercussions of a Sale That Turned Out Not Happening – part II
(based on ruling 83045 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: A Contractor’s Leaving the Job in the Middle – part II
based on ruling 84013 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Tuition Payment after Withdrawing Student
based on ruling 85142 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
