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 (804)
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
807 - P'ninat Mishpat: Multiple Agreements and Parties – part IV
Load More
P'ninat Mishpat: End of Tenure of Development Company – part II
based on ruling 77097 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Tammuz 5785
P'ninat Mishpat: A Seller with Questionable Rights to the Property – part II
based on ruling 84062 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Cheshvan 5786
P'ninat Mishpat: Amounts and Conditions of Payment to an Architect – part III
based on ruling 83061 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Sivan 5785
P'ninat Mishpat: Problematic Lights?
based on appeal of ruling 84085 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Cheshvan 5786
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
Connecting Disciplines in Torah Study
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook 103 – part III
Sivan 15 5782
A Commercial Rental for a Closed Business – part II
based on ruling 80047 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Shvat 1 5782
Semi-solicited Advice to Calm Down Petach Tikva
#227 Date and Place: 8 Tishrei 5669, Yafo
19 Sivan 5784
