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.)



   Search this site            powered by FreeFind

The Jewish Law Association website is
hosted by the Centre for Jewish Studies
at the University of Manchester

About | Officers | Constitution | Membership | Conferences
Publications | Abstracts | Resources | Courses | Links

View the framed or non-framed version of this site