Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Compromise and Aftermath: Although beit din reasons that pl could nullify the sale and adjust the amount to be returned, the sides made a compromise in which pl would return the car, and beit din worked with them on figuring out how much def would pay, by working on price lists. As this was happening, pl continued to use the car (no instructions had been given on that point), and the engine was ruined from cumulative overuse. Def is no longer willing to take the car back at any price.
P'ninat Mishpat (835)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
785 - P'ninat Mishpat: Dividing Returns on Partially Cancelled Trip – part II
786 - P'ninat Mishpat: Using Car that Was Supposed to be Returned
787 - P'ninat Mishpat: A Used Car with a Tendency Toward Engine Problems
Load More
Ruling: Majority opinion: Since the car was to be returned, pl had no right to continue using it. Although continued use of a sales item after a blemish is discovered usually precludes nullifying the sale due to mechila (Rambam, Mechira 15:3), that does not apply here after pl went to the trouble of suing to return it (see Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 232:4).
Although one who borrows something without permission is like a thief, who has to pay for the stolen object if he is unable to return it intact, for whatever reason, there is a machloket whether that is the case when he did not realize he did not have permission to do so (as believed to be the case here). Even so, a borrower has to pay for all damages to the object even if it was not at all his fault unless the object "died as of a result of proper use" (meita machamat melacha = mmm). Although our case is mmm, the exemption does not apply here based on mmm’s logic. One explanation of mmm is that it is considered that the borrower was deceived by receiving an object that cannot safely do what it was borrowed for (Ramban). Another is that the lender relinquishes rights to payment when the borrower uses it (Rambam). Neither of those explanations applies to pl who did not even have permission to use it, and therefore he has the full obligation of a borrower for any damage. Therefore, the true value of the car at the time it was improperly borrowed should be reduced from the amount def was supposed to pay pl.
The minority opinion views pl as borrowing with permission, considering that he had bought the car and used it, and def did not ask him to stop. Therefore, he is exempt either due to mmm or because until it is returned, he is still considered the owner of the car.
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
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 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: 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 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: Late and Flawed Apartment
based on ruling 82174 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Did Any Furniture Go to the Buyer? – part II
based on ruling 84093 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
