YeshivaThe torah world Gateway
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: The contract states that pl1-4 must paint it before returning it. Nevertheless, pl1-4 argue that since the contract also says that they received the apartment painted, since this is false, they are not bound by the clause to paint. This argument is wrong on several grounds. For one, generally, if one signs that he attests to the proper condition of an apartment, he accepts the consequences of the situation when it were true, even if it is not objectively so. In other words, pl1-4 could not have complained about the apartment’s state after signing such a clause. It does not include a concession of the landlord that they can return it in the same form.
Also, in this case, the rental was effectively a six-year rental with a group of women (the group’s makeup partially changed sporadically). The rental started with a freshly painted apartment, and must end, based on the contract, with a freshly painted apartment. If pl1-4 wanted to treat each (yearly) renewal of the contract as a new rental, they should have painted it themselves every year. The fact that they decided not to should not deny def the proper return of the apartment. Although pl1-4 argued that the responsibility should be equally assumed by all the renters over the years, if those who stayed in the apartment or entered it did not demand that those leaving leave money for the painting, that was their decision. Therefore, pl1-4 must pay for the painting.
Def claimed 7,000 NIS for the painting, which is what he paid a professional painter. Beit din awarded only 3,000 NIS, corresponding to the expense of a non-professional job. The contract does not say that the painting must be professional, and def implied in the hearing that pl1-4 could have done it themselves. Since def led pl1-4 to believe that he was letting them get away with not painting and did not inform them that he would sue, he had no right to spend more on what turns out to be their account than they would have had to spend themselves.
Def cannot charge pl1-4 for the loss of his renters. There is no evidence that pl1-4’s behavior directly caused the new renters to not take the apartment. Indications are that the renters decided to back out of the agreement because of the quality of the apartment (as def blamed pl1-4 for lashon hara about it), and the new renters were unlikely allowed to back out. If def decided to let them "off the hook," he cannot obligate pl1-4 in their place.
P'ninat Mishpat (832)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
791 - P'ninat Mishpat: Overpaying Rent by One of the Roommates – part I
792 - P'ninat Mishpat: Overpaying Rent by One of the Roommates – part II
793 - P'ninat Mishpat: Who Has Rights in the Courtyard?
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Multiple Agreements and Parties – part IV
based on final ruling of 80082 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat Repercussions of a Sale that Turned Out Not Happening – part III
(based on ruling 83045 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: Unsuccessful Transfer of Yeshiva – part V
based on appeal ruling 82138 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Late and Flawed Apartment
based on ruling 82174 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Rabbis in Midrash
Lessons
fast navigation
Shoftim TESHUVA IN COURT OF LAW?
Parshat Shoftim-Chodesh Elul
Why does parshat Shoftim always come out during Elul? This innovative and central explanation is an eye-opener regarding many aspects of Judaism.
The Month of Elul TESHUVA IS THE ANSWER
The month of Elul serves as a vital time for self-reflection and personal accountability to prepare for true repentance.
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)
(based on ruling 85031 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
P'ninat Mishpat Complaints about Contractor’s Work – part II
(based on ruling 83037.1 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
(based on ruling 83037.1 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
Chemdat Yamim Moreshet Shaul: The Goal of an Agricultural Yeshiva – part I
Based on Siach Shaul, Pirkei Machshava V’Hadracha p. 263 (address at the laying of the cornerstone of the Yeshiva Chakla’it in Kfar Haroeh)
Based on Siach Shaul, Pirkei Machshava V’Hadracha p. 263 (address at the laying of the cornerstone of the Yeshiva Chakla’it in Kfar Haroeh)
Chemdat Yamim The Goal of an Agricultural Yeshiva – part II
Based on Siach Shaul, Pirkei Machshava V’Hadracha p. 263 (address at the cornerstone laying for the Yeshiva Chakla’it in Kfar Haroeh – 1938)
Based on Siach Shaul, Pirkei Machshava V’Hadracha p. 263 (address at the cornerstone laying for the Yeshiva Chakla’it in Kfar Haroeh – 1938)
Re'e NEVER EXTREME EXCEPT ISRAEL
Parshat Re'eh
Judaism is against extremism, so how can we understand the seemingly extreme statements found in our sages in favor of living in the Land of Israel and against living in Chutz laAretz? The article deals with the seeming contradiction between the strength of Free-Will and the strength of being influenced by our surroundings.
Ekev DANCE FOR ISRAEL- FOR YOUR BENEFIT
Parshat Eikev
Description: The 7 Haftarot we read after Tisha B'Av ("Shiva D'Nichemta") surely get us excited that they're coming TRUE, and awaken us to yearn, dance & join the return to Zion! The short article also deals with the problems and solutions facing the American Jewish community as discussed at a recent panel, as well as the question why Jews come from America to Israel to help when we face problems, but Israelis don't come to aid Jews in America when they face anti-Semitism.
