Об этом документе

Torah & Horaah — rabbi fleischman-naso - tenant vacated but did not fulfill his contractual obligations 5786

Выпуск: Torah & Horaah — rabbi fleischman-naso - tenant vacated but did not fulfill his contractual obligations 5786. 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 Naso 5786 814  Question in Choshen Mishpot  By Rabbi Yosef Fleischman Tenant Vacated but did not Fulfill his Contractual Obligations Question I rented an apartment in Israel. owner from renting out the animal for a period of The second ruling (CM 310, 3) is based on a time after the rental period due to the negligence responsum of the Rosh concerning one who of the borrower, the only payment that the renter rented an animal for two days but, due to the is required to pay is sheves-damages to the unexpected rise in the water level of a river, he animal's owner because his animal was sidelined could not return the animal until the end of the due to the injury. The Rosh ruled that if the renter was whether a renter is liable for sheves damage since aware that at times the river becomes impassible 1 Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to the rabbanim of our Beis Horaah at www.dinonline.org and the animal's owner was unaware of this, According to this approach you must pay for the the renter must pay rent for the third day even time it takes to paint the apartment. In for causative damages if they are classified as the second approach we don't view it as damage gromo, in the case of a renter there is a tacit but as continuing the rental until the animal is agreement between the owner and the renter once again fit to be rented to others. Since responsibility for the reason the employer must pay their salary even renter's failure to return the animal rests with though they never began working for him is the renter, he must continue paying rent until the because they could not earn another salary on animal is returned. (Rental Hashulchan (307, 11) understands that the Noda and hiring are comparable because when one Biyehuda only classifies the damages as sheves if hires an employee, he is effectively renting the the animal is returned in a usable state and only employee.) afterwards, 2 due to the damage, became unusable. This explains why the renter of the animal must Questions in all areas of halacha can be submitted to t

Издание

Torah & Horaah

Дата

22 мая 2026 г.

Страниц

3