Yeshiva
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- P'ninat Mishpat
Ruling: It is true that in regard to the major question of pl’s right to expand beyond def’s permission, pl did not have the right. However, def was required to see the legal process through and not start work in a manner that caused damage to pl’s assets and possessions in the area of their work. Therefore, there are grounds for certain damage payments. The claims though are problematic, because they are "wholesale," with little documentation on what was damaged and what they were worth. While it would be best to bring in an expert to do these evaluations, the relatively small amount of viable claims makes it unfeasible to spend the sides’ money on an expert. Beit din will have to estimate.
One type of demand is that a damaged element be returned and fixed, such as a damaged sewage line. In that case, for example, a new permanent line is going to be built in accordance with the correct position of pl’s home. Therefore, it makes no sense in many of those cases to reconstruct that which will soon be unviable.
There is a halachic obligation to pay municipal taxes (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 163:1). This is true even if a member of the community does not benefit from all that the municipality provides (Rama ad loc. 3). All residents certainly must pay for matters of security, local batei knesset, electricity, water, and internet, among other things. While the Rama writes (CM 163:6) that those who do not need help from the lords to collect debts do not have to pay for that service, the S’ma (163:32) distinguishes between services that are by their nature public and those that are private. Since pl did not prove that there are relevant services that they are excluded from wrongly, they are not able to receive an alleviation from the fees.
On the one hand, while those in charge of public funds are not absolutely required to make an exact accounting, it is generally recommended they do so to prevent doubts (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 257:2). Therefore, we expect def to be more forthcoming in this matter. However, lack of full disclosure does not excuse pl from paying municipal taxes.
With this we conclude our treatment of this important dispute, which touched on many general communal principles.
P'ninat Mishpat (835)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
828 - Regulation of Land Rights in a Settlement Extension – part IV
829 - Regulation of Land Rights in a Settlement Extension – part V
830 - P'ninat Mishpat: Complaints about Contractor’s Work – part II
Load More
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
P'ninat Mishpat Limits of Interest Rate for Loan with Heter Iska – part I
based on ruling 80033 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
P'ninat Mishpat Repercussions of a Sale That Turned Out Not Happening – part II
(based on ruling 83045 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)
Igrot Hare’aya Trying to Arrange Purchase of Land in Eretz Yisrael
#222 Date and Place: 2 Elul 5669 (1909), Rechovot
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: Unsuccessful Transfer of Yeshiva – part V
based on appeal ruling 82138 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
