Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: Was the first agreement a sale or a rental? Pl claimed that in three ways it is evident the rental was an unofficial sale. 1. The rental contract mentions the planned sale and lists a price for it. 2. The "rent" will be reduced from the sales price if and when the sale happens. 3. Pl agreed to not sell the house to anyone else during the time def was working on getting accepted to the yishuv. Def points out that the "sales price" in the contract was not followed, as def agreed to not count the rental payment toward the sales payment because of another tax that cropped up unexpectedly. Since pl saw the price as not fixed, the agreement was not a full-fledged sale but a statement of hopes for the future.
The question is not what the plans were but whether the sides ultimately built it as a sale or a rental, and the latter is clearly the case. Both its basic terminology and many specific elements of the agreement relate specifically to rentals. Even the matter of the price of the sale did not end up being a sign of sale, considering that it changed. Therefore, there was no sale, and there is no reason that pl, to his misfortune, should not have to pay the mas hashbacha.
Can there be claims of mekach ta’ut (nullification of an agreement based on misinformation)? Factually, it is agreed that the urban planning rules were final and available before the legal sale but that neither of the sides knew about it. This raises the possibility of mekach ta’ut. Although mekach ta’ut based on mispricing does not apply to real estate, if there was a mistake on a factual point, such as the size of the property, then there is mekach ta’ut (Kiddushin 42b).
We continue next time about nullifying (elements of) the agreement based on misinformation.
P'ninat Mishpat (835)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
741 - Mutual Repairs Agreement – part II
742 - Who Pays for an Unexpected Tax? – part I
743 - Who Pays for an Unexpected Tax? – part II
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
P'ninat Mishpat Profits from Formerly Joint Swimming Pool – part
(based on ruling 81110 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 Payments after a Gradual End of Employment
(Based on ruling 82024 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
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Agricultural Water Rights – part I
based on ruling 84122 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: How Many Dayanim?
based on ruling 84139-1 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: A Seller with Questionable Rights to the Property – part II
based on ruling 84062 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: A Seller with Questionable Rights to the Property – part I
based on ruling 84062 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
