Об этом документе

Torah & Horaah — Shemini 5782

Выпуск: Torah & Horaah — Shemini 5782. Темы: не определены автоматически. If however, one of your children or a 1 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org stranger broke the tiles, then the reason your minor son who caused the damages, you are required to repair the floor is and the second is that the clause that you only because you agreed to return the must return the apartment in the same apartment in the same condition as you condition as you received it is valid and received it. consensus is like the Shach, that a house Thus, he would rule that in Israel, where is classified in halachah as an immovable this condition is customary, even if it was object even though it was built from not written in your rental agreement you movable materials. However, Rav possible sources for your liability for Eliashev added that it is customary in the broken tiles, we have to determine Israel to add a clause, as your landlord whether based on each source it suffices did, that the renter must return the if you simply replace the broken tiles apartment in the same condition as he or, since the new tiles do not match the received it, and if that clause is present original tiles, you are obligated to change in the questioner’s contract he would be all the tiles. Your landlord’s position is that 2 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org you would not fulfill the condition of understand them and not by their literal your contract if you do not replace all the or legal meaning. When it came time to fulfill his expressions that are used in agreements promise, A said he would fulfill his pledge is that they are interpreted in the manner by giving B the amount he promised that they are customarily used by people with the condition that B returns the in the place and at the time when and money to him. This even though in many cases of Torah law is also the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (see Kiddushin 6A) we view a conditional (CM 61, 16) who states, “Conditions in present as a present, nevertheless, when contracts are governed by intent and we are considering a present that was not by literal interpretation.” Thus, the promised to someone else, we do not previously cited Kesef Hakodoshim states that even though rental view a present given with this c

Издание

Torah & Horaah

Дата

25 марта 2022 г.

Страниц

4