Об этом документе

Torah & Horaah — Mikeitz 5785

Выпуск: Torah & Horaah — Mikeitz 5785. Темы: не определены автоматически. D iN our site: WWW.dinonline.org.il THE TORAH& INTETNATIONAL BEIS HORAA The Institute for Dayanim HORAAH And under the auspices of Beis Horaah in memory of Baruch and Bracha Gross Miketz 5785 316  Question in Choshen Mishpot  By Rabbi Yosef Fleischman Employer Didn't Pay a Pension Plan and Later Pays the Lost Earnings Question I am employed by a small company in Israel. Our employer then proceeded to take out a pension plan on each employee's behalf and deposited the amount that would have been in their pension fund had he paid on time, including the principal that would have been paid from the worker and from the employer and the profits that were actually made by the fund in those years. Answer The basis for your first question is a ruling 2) that if someone forces a person to give of the Gemara (BB 40B) and SA (CM 205, him a present the recipient may not keep1 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org the present because the one who gave the debt, he will win and keep the field without present did not really want to give it and an paying for it. the approach of Rav Hai and Rabbenu The reason the first issue requires scrutiny Chananeil, the Maharik (res 185) cites a is that in the classical case of coercion Gemara (Shevuos 46A) that rules that if a that we find in the Gemara, the method of person threatens someone that he will chop coercion is physical force. For example, the down his tree and later we see that the tree Gemara (BB 48A) discusses the validity of a was chopped down we cannot assume that korban that was given as a result of coercion the one who threatened was the one who and there the coercion that was employed actually chopped it down because many was physical coercion. The explanation of the Ra'avyo is that in the After three years the lender blackmailed his case of the Gemara the lender acted as an borrower, saying that if he doesn't formally owner and had already acted by hiding the sell him the field, he will claim (falsely) that evidence that the field did not belong to him. Therefore, the 2 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org Maharik rules that if the one who gave the second concern, i.e., whether the additional present did not

Издание

Torah & Horaah

Дата

27 декабря 2024 г.

Страниц

4