Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: Second fee agreement: Beit din concluded that the agreement, when completed without def3’s signature was invalid, but that def3’s behavior confirmed his acceptance of the agreement. We disagree. From communications between pl and def3, it is clear that what def3 helped pl with was a document that def1 and def2 would view as obligatory, so that def2 would give def1’s money to pl. Had def3 agreed to obligate def, he would have just signed the agreement, which he told pl that he refused to do. Indeed, this was a dishonest maneuver of both pl and def3. This is different from the situation regarding the second sales agreement, as promoting that agreement must by force affect all the partners of def, so that def3’s participation shows his agreement. Beit din also relied on def’s meeting minutes, which served as a way to accept the fee agreement. However, there is no indication, including the signature of someone other than def3, that def3 was part of the meeting’s decision. (Parenthetically, def claimed that the fee in the agreement is exaggerated, but this is not needed operatively because we have rejected the agreement’s validity anyway.)
First fee agreement: Beit din reasoned that even though the second fee agreement is invalid, it is clear that pl needs to be paid for the work he did, and therefore one can rely on the first fee agreement between pl and def1. However, we do not accept the validity of that agreement because pl’s signature does not appear on it. Therefore, we are left with the sales agreement, which gives pl a significant discount on an apartment. Beyond that, we return the matter to beit din to determine what other further fee pl is entitled to.
P'ninat Mishpat (803)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
805 - P'ninat Mishpat: Multiple Agreements and Parties – part II
806 - P'ninat Mishpat: Multiple Agreements and Parties – part III
Load More
P'ninat Mishpat: Using Car that Was Supposed to be Returned
based on ruling 84065 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Av 5785
P'ninat Mishpat: Return of Down Payment Due to War – part II
based on ruling 84044 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Elul 5785
P'ninat Mishpat: Amounts and Conditions of Payment to an Architect – part IV
based on appeal of ruling 83061 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Sivan 5785
P'ninat Mishpat: Return of Down Payment Due to War – part I
based on ruling 84044 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Elul 5785
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
A Commercial Rental for a Closed Business – part II
based on ruling 80047 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Shvat 1 5782
Interceding Regarding a Will
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook #105
Sivan 28 5782
Profits from Formerly Joint Swimming Pool – part
(based on ruling 81110 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
19 Sivan 5784
