YeshivaThe torah world Gateway
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
- Family and Society
- Financial Laws and Tzedaka
- Contracts and Agreements
Ruling: There are two grounds for obligation to pay for services: agreement (missing here); benefit received (debated here; see Shut Harashba IV:125). In this case, an Israeli law (from 2012) precludes a realtor’s ability to demand a fee without a detailed contract. The point of the law is to prevent situations of dispute whether a fee is warranted and how much it is. The law is designed even for cases where the benefit from the work is clear. Beit din generally accepts this law, although in certain cases, where its logic is not pertinent and not levying the fee would cause an injustice, our beit din may obligate, at least partial, payment. This is based on the presumption that the rabbinic community should be in agreement with a law for it to be halachically binding (Shut Chatam Sofer, V:45).
Def seems to have received great financial advantage from the purchase, pl did put serious work into it, and pl could likely have marketed it to someone else. Therefore, it seems unfair for def not to pay anything. Although def said to fm and his lawyer that he was unwilling to pay, the Pri Tevuah (cited in Pitchei Teshuva, Choshen Mishpat 264:3) says that he must pay for the benefit received. The Chazon Ish (Bava Batra 2:6) agrees in cases where the recipient’s benefit is evident and it is unfeasible for the provider to take back the benefit provided. Since some disagree with the Pri Tevuah or limit the ruling to cases where the recipient never showed interest in the service (see Pitchei Choshen, Sechirut 8:(64)), the matter depends on a machloket. Although def’s claim that he was not interested in the purchase if he had to pay more was not proved, we cannot extract payment out of doubt.
At times, it may be possible to force someone to pay, especially to a worker, beyond the letter of the law (see opinions in the Rama, CM 12:2). However, here, pl bears some fault, as he had ample opportunities to have def sign a contract. While pl’s demand for payment may have been miscommunicated before the contract was signed, it behooved pl to inquire how def responded to it. His failure to do so seems to indicate that pl preferred to make sure that def bought the property and then to try to receive payment based on moral persuasion. Therefore, beit din exempted def totally.
P'ninat Mishpat (832)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
787 - P'ninat Mishpat: How Much Was Agreed to Pay for Renovations?
788 - P'ninat Mishpat: Realtor Fee Despite the Buyer’s Refusal?
789 - P'ninat Mishpat: Overpaying Rent by One of the Roommates – part I
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
Igrot Hare’aya Connecting Disciplines in Torah Study
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook #103 – part II
P'ninat Mishpat Limits of Interest Rate for Loan with Heter Iska – part I
based on ruling 80033 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat Who Breached the Contract? – part IV
Based on ruling 81087 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Igrot Hare’aya Trying to Arrange Purchase of Land in Eretz Yisrael
#222 Date and Place: 2 Elul 5669 (1909), Rechovot
P'ninat Mishpat Complaints about Contractor’s Work – part II
(based on ruling 83037.1 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Sharing in Plumbing Expenses – part I
based on ruling 85013 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: A Contractor’s Leaving the Job in the Middle – part I
based on ruling 84013 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Rabbis in Midrash
Lessons
fast navigation
Israel and the Nations A Few Minutes & Many Innovative Ideas on Antisemitism & What to do About It
As we approach the High Holidays, this short lecture (18 minutes) deals with the unfortunate situation of how Israel and the Jewish People stand against antisemitism, analyzing its cause according to Rav Kook, and how to deal with the issue pragmatically & via our prayers.
Ha'azinu PURSUIT is PERFECTION
p. Ha'azinu, Shabbat Shuva
Rav Kook deals with the question of the seemingly hopeless nature of Tshuva. For G-d Himself knows that He created us with free will, which inevitably means we will sometimes make mistakes and choose wrong. This can easily be frustrating, freezing us into inaction and ye'ush (loss of hope). If one sins even once, does he chalila have no choice but suicide?! Moreover, our Godly conscience demands justice, righteousness and perfection, but we all know this is impossible, so what's the solution? Rav Kook's innovative thinking, strongly based on chazal (our sages), offers an inciteful and important aspect to this topic, especially this time of year!
Sukkot Bug-Free Sukkah: Essential Halachic and Practical Schach Guide
How to inspect, clean, and store bamboo mats and palm branches to protect your mitzvah and holiday meals.
