Об этом документе

Torah & Horaah — Yisro 5783

Выпуск: Torah & Horaah — Yisro 5783. Темы: не определены автоматически. The first is that valid unless it is explicitly agreed.) the Gemoro states clearly (BK 57A) that when Since your friend did not receive express a shomeir returns an object to the owner he permission from you to return the car to must inform the owner of its return. Therefore, we did not set up a specific time that he would must determine whether the fact that your return the car, your friend did not exit his friend was responsible for the car suffices to status as a watchman over your car when require your friend to reimburse you for the he parked it at night. However, in this car to a place on the street near the owner’s situation the one who sustained a fine is you, house and informing the owner is normally and the Torah never made a sho’eil directly a valid return is because the owner agrees liable for losses sustained by the borrowed to consider this an act of return since that is object’s owner. (See Mishpetei The next possibility to consider is that Hachoshen page 467-8 for a discussion of perhaps this is a causative damage that 2 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org falls into the category known as garmi, for An interesting case that illustrates this which your friend is liable – not as a sho'eil difficulty is a ruling of the Terumas Hadeshen but as a mazik. objected to this ruling since he felt that the likelihood was sufficiently great that the thief When the Rosh (BK 9, 13) gives guidelines would steal to make it "inevitable." to determine whether a causative damage We should note further that Tosafos (BB falls into the category of garmi or gromo, 22B), who give criteria that are quite similar one of his conditions for being considered to the Rosh, omit the condition that the garmi is that the damage must have been an damage must be certain. However, it is difficult to parked it that your car would be ticketed, it force someone to pay based on this Chasam seems that according to the Rosh you cannot Sofer since many, including the Nesivos (58, require your friend to reimburse you on the 2), deflect the Chasam Sofer’s proof and grounds of garmi. However he would nonetheless be that the result is considered "inevitable." For well-advised to pay since 1] according to example, the Maharit (1, 98) was inclined at m

Издание

Torah & Horaah

Дата

10 февраля 2023 г.

Страниц

3