Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: Cause and consequences of pl’s quitting – Pl claims that the number of changes and lack of clear plans made it highly inefficient for pl to bring in subcontractors and workers. Def claims that the number of changes was appropriate for the project.
An employer cannot change the work ordered to more difficult work (Tosefta, Bava Metzia 7:3), both regarding a hired worker and a contractor. Multiple witnesses who were involved in the work testified that the changes and lack of detailed plans made the work much harder than usual. While def may make changes, it justifies pl receiving commensurate compensation. Since def refused to give what we consider fair payment, pl was justified in stopping to work and receive full payment for what he did, without deducting the extra expense of bringing others to finish.
The authority of ins: The contract states that ins will decide if and how much should be charged for changes to the work. However, beit din rules that pl should be able to appeal such decisions to beit din, who should overrule ins if and only if his decision is clearly unreasonable, based on market realities. This is in line with the Shulchan Aruch’s ruling (Choshen Mishpat 227:25) that if a sales price was supposed to be decided by an appraiser and he was off from the standard price enough to be ona’ah, the laws of ona’ah impact the sale. The Aruch Hashuchan (ad loc. 26) explains that he did not mean to rely upon the appraiser if he was "off base." This can be assumed to be so here especially because ins was hired and paid for by def.
Damage to mechanism to lower and raise blinds: An electrical overload toward the end of the building damaged some systems that were attached at the time, and def demands to be compensated for it. Experts who testified said that the main problem was a defective circuit breaker, which is rare (app. 1/1,000) considering the brand used was reputable. The expert brought by def claimed that while most electricians do not check such things, it is proper to check that the circuit breaker is working before attaching appliances.
P'ninat Mishpat (835)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
761 - P'ninat Mishpat: Questions of Changing Work Orders
762 - P'ninat Mishpat: Unpaid Fees of a No-Show to Beit Din
763 - P'ninat Mishpat: Used Car with a Faulty Motor
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 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: Multiple Agreements and Parties – part IV
based on final ruling of 80082 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
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 P'ninat Mishpat: Sharing in Plumbing Expenses – part II
based on ruling 85013 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Problematic Lights?
based on appeal of ruling 84085 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)
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Multiple Agreements and Parties – part II
based on ruling 80082 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
