Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: Payment for watchmen: Pl paid for watchmen to secure the building site for 10 months, paying 114,000 NIS, and is demanding reimbursement because the agreement obligated def to pay. Def claims the right to withhold the money in lieu of the money pl allegedly owes them.

P'ninat Mishpat (801)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
803 - P'ninat Mishpat: End of Tenure of Development Company – part I
804 - P'ninat Mishpat: End of Tenure of Development Company – part II
805 - P'ninat Mishpat: Reducing Amount Owed Due to Interest Taken
Load More
Responsibility for flawed work: Def complains of many flaws in the building from pl’s time of work and claims pl must pay because they are responsible for selecting and supervising the contractors and subcontractors.
Pl is indeed legally required to arrange and supervise others’ work, but this does not normally include financial responsibility. Pl can be sued for not doing a reasonable job in the selecting process (limited in many cases because def must approve the contractor(s)). Pl employed multiple building supervisors, and there is no credible claim that the supervision was not done responsibly. Furthermore, even if pl were irresponsible in supervising, the first level of responsibility is on the (sub)contractors, and after def replaced pl, they were required to register the complaints with the (sub)contractors and, if necessary, sue them. Therefore, pl need not pay for any of the flaws raised.
Windows: Def claims that pl improperly built the window frames in a manner that would fit only windows that pl imports from abroad so that they could receive extra profit as an importer and when def refused, pl did not provide an alternative of Israeli windows, which def had to find. Def demands reduction of what pl received on the project as well as 17,000 NIS for having to chisel the window frames for a new size of window.
Beit din found in the sides’ correspondences that pl informed def early enough of their recommendation to import the windows, and did not receive money for arranging the windows. Their recommendation does not make them liable, and it is not problematic to try to make extra profit if they did not withhold information. Whether there was a need for extra chiseling or that was unchanged requires expert testimony to determine, and it serves the sides’ interests to not pay for such testimony. Therefore, we employ compromise and obligate pl 10,000 NIS for this.

P'ninat Mishpat: Used Car with a Faulty Motor
based on ruling 84020 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Shevat 5784

P'ninat Mishpat: Late and Flawed Apartment
based on ruling 82174 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Kislev 5786

P'ninat Mishpat: Reducing Amount Owed Due to Interest Taken
based on ruling 84057 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Tammuz 5785

P'ninat Mishpat: Did Any Furniture Go to the Buyer? – part II
based on ruling 84093 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Kislev 5786

Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit

Repercussions of a Sale That Turned Out Not Happening – part II
(based on ruling 83045 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
18 Sivan 5784

Payment for Not Clearing Warehouse On Time – part II
based on ruling 75076 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Av 20 5780

Profits from Formerly Joint Swimming Pool – part
(based on ruling 81110 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
19 Sivan 5784























