Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: If it were plausible to read the contract as not allowing for refund in this case, then we would employ the rule that "one who needs the contract has the lower hand" (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 54:5) to say that since pl is trying to use the clause to extract money from def, they cannot do so. However, in this case, it is implausible. The contract states that the minimum number of people at the Shabbat is 80, and the event was described as an SSB. Since more than 50 people could not gather and since the wedding was postponed, the event as ordered is impossible. Therefore, pl have a contractual right to a refund.
While pl agreed to settle for a credit rather than a return of money, there is no indication that pl agreed to the strict conditions def imposed on the refund. Since the two have not agreed on an event that is acceptable to both, that proposal does not erase the right to the refund.
It is still a question whether def can take off for expenses he incurred in providing for pl’s event. If def is seen as working for pl, then he deserves to be paid for the expenses he incurred on pl’s behalf (Rama, CM 91:3). If, though, def was in effect selling food and services, then the expenses he incurred were his own, and this seems the stronger way of viewing the matter. Also, def was asked to provide receipts and detailed claims over what he spent the claimed money on, and what he produced was very unconvincing. Also, pl cancelled a week before the SSB, and although def claimed he cooked a tremendous amount in advance and froze it, this is strange for a high-level caterer to do for a small event. Finally, the videos of def’s feeding the soldiers show him barbequing on the spot, i.e, it wasn’t cooked previously. Therefore, the great majority of def’s defenses were rejected and he had to return almost all of the down payment.
P'ninat Mishpat (835)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
791 - P'ninat Mishpat: Return of Down Payment Due to War – part II
792 - P'ninat Mishpat: Return of Down Payment Due to War – part III
793 - P'ninat Mishpat: Smoking Rights in a Rental? – part I
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
Igrot Hare’aya Trying to Arrange Purchase of Land in Eretz Yisrael
#222 Date and Place: 2 Elul 5669 (1909), Rechovot
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)
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 Who Breached the Contract? – part IV
Based on ruling 81087 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 III
based on ruling 84013 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat P'ninat Mishpat: Agricultural Water Rights – part I
based on ruling 84122 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
