- Sections
- P'ninat Mishpat
The Torah study is dedicated in the memory of
Chana bat Chaim
One Who Tripped in a Store
Damage Payment for One Who Tripped in a Store , A Condensation of a P’sak by Beit Din Gazit of Tzefat.
Case:A customer (=pl) entered a store and tripped on a slightly elevated tile, resulting in a fractured rib and complications that caused him much anguish, two weeks of missed work, and a restriction on lifting heavy items. Pl demands significant compensation for all of the above, especially considering that if the storeowner (=def) were insured, the insurance would have been obligated to pay generously.
Ruling:The gemara (Bava Kama 49b) deals with a machloket among Tannaim and Amoraim regarding if one is obligated to pay for damages caused by a "bor" (pit, and other equivalent situations) that exists in the defendant’s own property. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 410:6) rules that if one dug a bor in his own property and relinquished his rights to the property in a manner that masses may enter, he is obligated. This is the situation regarding a store, where one invites whoever wants to enter. However, beit din toured the store and found that the tile upon which pl fell was higher by only a tiny amount and, the store’s longtime workers attest that in the many years that the situation existed nobody had fallen. Therefore, there is at best a safek bor (a possibility that a "pit" exists).
In our times, when authentic semicha no longer exists, there are certain areas of adjudication that our dayanim cannot perform. Among them are matters of payment that exceed the actual damage. The poskim dispute whether our dayanim can judge matters of bor (Shvut Yaakov I, 136) or not (Shach, CM 1:2, in the name of the Maharshal), but the Pitchei Teshuva (1:1) and others accept the opinion that they can.
The payment for damages caused by a bor consists of what is known as nezek, which is permanent damages that would result in the lowering of the person’s value were he to be sold as a slave. However, other payments, such as for medical bills, missed work, embarrassment, and anguish, do not apply to bor (Shulchan Aruch, CM 410:34). In our case, there is no long-term damage, as pl’s situation is improving and is expected to return to normal. Beit din has found out that pl’s claim that he will never be able to lift heavy items is not medically sound. Since we are talking about a safek bor and the payments do not fit under the category of those that can be levied, beit din cannot obligate def to pay.
However, it is standard practice for businesses to insure themselves for cases such as these, and it is clear that had def done so, def would be entitled to significant payment. If he had sued (improperly) in secular court he would have likely received significant payment. Therefore, def accepted beit din’s request that he agree to pay, based on the concept of willing compromise, for the anguish he caused. Beit din set the payment at 2,000 shekels.
Ruling:The gemara (Bava Kama 49b) deals with a machloket among Tannaim and Amoraim regarding if one is obligated to pay for damages caused by a "bor" (pit, and other equivalent situations) that exists in the defendant’s own property. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 410:6) rules that if one dug a bor in his own property and relinquished his rights to the property in a manner that masses may enter, he is obligated. This is the situation regarding a store, where one invites whoever wants to enter. However, beit din toured the store and found that the tile upon which pl fell was higher by only a tiny amount and, the store’s longtime workers attest that in the many years that the situation existed nobody had fallen. Therefore, there is at best a safek bor (a possibility that a "pit" exists).
In our times, when authentic semicha no longer exists, there are certain areas of adjudication that our dayanim cannot perform. Among them are matters of payment that exceed the actual damage. The poskim dispute whether our dayanim can judge matters of bor (Shvut Yaakov I, 136) or not (Shach, CM 1:2, in the name of the Maharshal), but the Pitchei Teshuva (1:1) and others accept the opinion that they can.
The payment for damages caused by a bor consists of what is known as nezek, which is permanent damages that would result in the lowering of the person’s value were he to be sold as a slave. However, other payments, such as for medical bills, missed work, embarrassment, and anguish, do not apply to bor (Shulchan Aruch, CM 410:34). In our case, there is no long-term damage, as pl’s situation is improving and is expected to return to normal. Beit din has found out that pl’s claim that he will never be able to lift heavy items is not medically sound. Since we are talking about a safek bor and the payments do not fit under the category of those that can be levied, beit din cannot obligate def to pay.
However, it is standard practice for businesses to insure themselves for cases such as these, and it is clear that had def done so, def would be entitled to significant payment. If he had sued (improperly) in secular court he would have likely received significant payment. Therefore, def accepted beit din’s request that he agree to pay, based on the concept of willing compromise, for the anguish he caused. Beit din set the payment at 2,000 shekels.

P'ninat Mishpat (658)
Various Rabbis
61 - Mi Shepara
62 - One Who Tripped in a Store
63 - Seller’s Responsibility after the Sale
Load More

Not Hiring Someone After Causing Him to Quit Job – part II
Various Rabbis | Kislev 11 5778

Disappointment with Arba Minim Sales Provisions – part I
based on ruling 74082 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Nissan 10 5782

Historical View of Rav Mordechai Yaakov Breish (Chelkat Yaakov)
Various Rabbis | 5775

Returning Money of an Iska Loan – part I
Various Rabbis | Adar 29 5777

Various Rabbis
Various Rabbis including those of of Yeshivat Bet El, such as Rabbi Chaim Katz, Rabbi Binyamin Bamberger and Rabbi Yitzchak Greenblat and others.

Guidelines for Peshara
5773

Levels of Thanks
5771

Historical View of Rav Mordechai Yaakov Breish (Chelkat Yaakov)
5775

Presence of Hashem in the Mind of a Sinner
5773

Prayer for Redemption and Blessings for Mashiach
Rabbi Avraham (Abe) Abrahami

The Need for a Mechitza Without a Minyan
Rabbi Daniel Mann | 5775
President Herzog visits Rabbi Wein
Rabbi Berel Wein | Nissan 17 5782

The Great Crock Pot Controversy
Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff | Iyar 5768
Daily Mishna - Shevi'it 5, 5-6
Rabbi Moshe Leib Halberstadt | Iyar 22 5782
Daily Mishna - Shevi'it 4, 9-10
Rabbi Moshe Leib Halberstadt | Iyar 19 5782
