logo
Project Fellow
 

 Fellow Weekly -  Issue 146

WHAT'S THE LAW  

  

 

 

 

Encouraging intelligent and entertaining debate at your Shabbat table.
 
Fellow Weekly raises issues of business law and ethics through lively emails by featuring your real-life scenarios answered by our leading authorities and professionals.
  

Dedicated for Refuah Sheleima for  Chaim Yehuda Aryeh ben Chava Rus & Adina bas Chana

 

DAYAN @ YOUR DESK # 2 

Lunch n' Learn Webinar 

 WEDNESDAY SEPT. 12th 2012 @ 12:45 PM - 1:05 PM EDT 

 

 followed by real-time question and answer session 

 

  

http://avacaster.com/event/Yesharim/  

* for general & corporate sponsorships, please email info@projectfellow.org

  

 

  

 

 

THIS WEEK'S PDF

kindly click here to support Project Fellow 

 

 

  

CASE 262: THE STERLING CHARACHTER
                                   
Horrified, dejected, rejected and cheated: sentiments during her engagement, she thought she'd never forget...
 
...A decade of mutual hard and rewarding work, Avital and Asher built a beautiful marriage together and were parenting children in a cheerful and healthy environment.
 
800 instead of 925 - while Asher's personality was sterling, the candlesticks her future mother-in-law presented to her; were not.
 
1. May Asher's mother compel the seller to annul the sale?
 
 
 
What's the Law?

  

Please email us with your comments, questions, and answers at weekly@projectfellow.org.

  

 

 

 

Last Week's Case 

  

CASE 260: THE SCHNITZEL SHAM
                                   

"Celebrate with The Schnitzel Place: Homemade Gourmet Meals for Less. $30 a plate. Delivery to hall and setup for an additional $2 a plate."

As the out of town guests eagerly arrived, Hyman and the bar mitzvah boy Josh's palpable excitement turned sour when they discovered a bare hall devoid of schnitzels.

The Schnitzel Place delivered the meals to the wrong hall.

  • The Schnitzel Place failed to deliver the meals to the appropriate location. Must Hyman pay for the meals?

 

 

What's the Law?

  

Please email us with your comments, questions, and answers at weekly@projectfellow.org.

  

 

 

 

The Answer

 

We present you here with a concise ruling. For a more intricate elucidation, please see the detailed explanation below.  

 

Whether The Schnitzel Place provided the delivery service themselves or else they hired a third party to do so, Hyman is absolved from paying for the meals.

If the third party delivery service was commissioned by Hyman independantly, Hyman remains liable towards The Schnitzel Place.

{Food for Thought: Is Amazon.com and its like commissioned by the vendor or the consumer to ensure merchandise's delivery?}  

  

  

  

Detailed Explanation    

 

 THE SCHNITZEL SHAM invokes the following laws.  

 

 1. When a defect in a sale is easily rectifiable (i.e. adding/subtracting an additional unit) the transaction is valid but the buyer may demand reimbursement for the difference [Choshen Mishpat 232:1].

  

2. A consumer whose defective merchandise is of such that when the defect is rectified it would not change or adversely affect the quality of the merchandise, may not annul the sale. Instead, he/she may require the seller to rectify the issue (and when appropriate duly deduct from the original sale price) [Choshen Mishpat 232:5, Nesivos 7].

3. Repairing the defect is the seller's responsibility. The consumer may annul the sale if the merchant does not fulfill his/her duty to repair the merchandise [Ulam Hamishpat Choshen Mishpat. 232].

4. Time-sensitive defects are not considered rectifiable after the time expires [Choshen Mishpat 232: Bach 4].

5. A merchant remains liable for merchandise en route to the consumer via the merchant's employee or courier [Choshen Mishpat 340:6].

Application  

 

Hyman ordered schnitzels to be delivered to his bar mitzvah hall. The sale included the production of the food and the delivery. While The Schnitzel Place prepared the food, they delivered it to the wrong destination. Hyman encountered a time sensitive defect in the sale.

 

The Schnitzel Place has a small window of opportunity to re-deliver it to the correct destination. Otherwise, Hyman may demand a full refund for the food.

 

This applies even if The Schnitzel Place outsourced their deliver service to a third party. If however, the delivery service were to be employed by Hyman, Hyman is not absolved from paying The Schnitzel Place for the food.

 

 

Note:
 
Although we aim to present the correct ruling, varying details are always important and decisively influence every individual case. Our readers are thus encouraged to present their personal cases to a competent authority and not solely rely on the information provided.
 

Together...for a better world
 You can help build a better world. Just invite your friends and family to subscribe to
 

Fellow Weekly.

 

To join this mailing list, please click here 
or send an email to weekly@projectfellow.org with the word subscribe in the subject line

  

 

    

CLICK HERE to DONATE to PROJECT FELLOW TODAY!

   

 

A project of
Yesharim Foundation for Ethical LawView our profile on LinkedIn
 
105/21 Sanhedria Murchevet, Jerusalem
ISRAEL 02-581-6337
USA 845-335-5516

Join Our Mailing List


Fellow - Yesharim | 105/21 Sanhedria Murchevet | Jerusalem | Israel