S. Revital, "Rabbinical Court Decisions in Matters of Partnership"
(Heb.), Diné Israel 13-14 (1986-1988), 91-111. - Any attempt
to apply Jewish law to a contemporary matter in Israeli law must confront
both the substantive legal issues at stake, and the question of jurisdiction,
i.e. should the matter go before a judge or before a dayyan. In the
present article, the author compares the decisions of the general courts
on partnership cases with those of the Rabbinical courts in the same area.
In the course of the comparison, the author points out that in contrast
to the purely halakhic nature of the substantive law applied by the Rabbinical
courts to areas falling within their sole jurisdiction, i.e. personal status,
partnership cases are decided according to Israeli law. The legal basis
for this is the principle of "situmta," i.e. the rule that
in matters of trade and commerce, local custom constitutes valid halakhah.
The author recommends that rather than "importing" substantive
Israeli law into the Rabbinical system, steps should be taken to "export"
the vast storehouse of halakhic material on partnership to the general courts.
One means for ensuring that this takes place is to add a clause to partnership
agreements specifying that any disputes arising out of them should be settled
by recourse to purely halakhic arguments. (D.B.S.)
| Officers | Constitution
| Membership | Conferences
Publications | Abstracts
| Resources | Courses
View the framed
or non-framed version of this site