Об этом документе

Torah & Horaah — Fleischman-Vo'eiro - Gave Head Checks for Merchandise Whose Wholesale Price Rose Drastically — Va'eira 5784

Выпуск: Torah & Horaah — Fleischman-Vo'eiro - Gave Head Checks for Merchandise Whose Wholesale Price Rose Drastically — Va'eira 5784. Темы: relationships_shalom_bayit. Поисковые термины: шалом байт, брак, отношения, shalom bayit, marriage, שלום בית, זוגיות. 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 Vo'eiro 5784 270  Question in Choshen Mishpot  By Rabbi Yosef Fleischman Gave Head Checks for Merchandise Whose Wholesale Price Rose Drastically Question I have a toy store and one of the items I sell is helium balloons. Since each month I use about two tanks, which sold for a thousand shekels per tank at the end of 2021, I gave my supplier at that time twenty- four monthly checks of two thousand shekels each to cover my purchases and to lock-in the price for the next two years. will assume that the commitment was executed The first is whether by giving your supplier legally and will examine if this commitment head checks your supplier became legally remains binding following the drastic price obligated to supply you with helium for the next rise. In this article we who had a daughter and who obligated himself 1 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org at the time of their marriage, in a legally valid upon himself responsibility even under such manner, to provide for the daughter's support circumstances. However, if there is an unusually steep rise included in one's commitment to recompense in prices the husband is not obligated, because his customer, so too they are not included we assume that the husband never intended in one's commitment to support his wife's to commit himself to provide for his wife's daughter. the Rambam and SA (CM 225, 3), based on the The Avnei Meluim (114, 2) contends that he Gemara (Gittin 73A), concerning someone who has proof that the Taz is incorrect but does not sold a field and obligated himself to compensate offer any rationale for his position. He explains that the property, he must return his customer's money fallacy in the Taz's comparison is that only if the field did not really belong to him or if it in the case of the Gemara, where there are had a previous lien on it which was exercised different circumstances that may cause

Издание

Torah & Horaah

Дата

12 января 2024 г.

Страниц

4

Темы: relationships_shalom_bayit