Is it permissible to take a khulu' fee for commercial shops or the like?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : There is a question regarding the topic of khulu' for commercial shops or the like?
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : Is it permissible to take a khulu' fee?
The Shaykh : This khulu' is generally not permissible, though in some rare cases it is permissible. First, the one who takes the khulu' in the permissible case, which will be explained, is the owner of the shop, not the tenant. Second, the owner of the shop may take the khulu' if the shop, house, or property is occupied by him or if he is the tenant of the property. A person comes and offers to the occupant of this property, whether the tenant or the landlord, saying to the occupant: "I need this shop, so hand it over to me." The occupant naturally says: "My brother, I am dependent on it for my livelihood." He says: "I know, but I will give you what satisfies you." They agree together, and he actually vacates the property for him. At that point, the name "vacating" (furog) is applied to the reality. However, in this permissible case, I said that if the tenant is the one taking it, it is only if the owner of the house is the landlord or the tenant. But this tenant does not deserve this vacating fee unless the landlord agrees to it, except in the case where there was a prior agreement between the landlord and the tenant that he has the right to vacate the place in what...
...the previous place is closed, and this shop is announced as available for rent. Then the tenant comes first of all and says to him: "My vacating fee is such-and-such thousand." Today, the vacating fee has become, in many cases in some countries, more than the value of the property. So he says to him: "The vacating fee is such-and-such thousand, and the annual rent is two, three, or five thousand." This is undoubtedly a type of consuming people's wealth unjustly; because when he says: "My vacating fee is such-and-such," it is empty talk. The shop is empty. When our fathers, grandfathers, and the early Muslims rented a place, this renting justified their benefiting from the vacancy of this place. But now, it is an innovation in transactions that renting alone justifies a person benefiting from the rented place, the rented property, to the extent that the landlord hands over what they call the vacating fee. The vacating fee is present and existing; no, this came about because of the material life lived by the disbelievers who have no mercy, and no such thing as a benevolent loan, or compassion, or justice. So we adopted it from them and began to deal with their transactions. This type of vacating fee is undoubtedly a form of consuming people's wealth unjustly, and this is prohibited by the explicit text of the Noble Qur'an.
Other than that?
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : Is it permissible to take a khulu' fee?
The Shaykh : This khulu' is generally not permissible, though in some rare cases it is permissible. First, the one who takes the khulu' in the permissible case, which will be explained, is the owner of the shop, not the tenant. Second, the owner of the shop may take the khulu' if the shop, house, or property is occupied by him or if he is the tenant of the property. A person comes and offers to the occupant of this property, whether the tenant or the landlord, saying to the occupant: "I need this shop, so hand it over to me." The occupant naturally says: "My brother, I am dependent on it for my livelihood." He says: "I know, but I will give you what satisfies you." They agree together, and he actually vacates the property for him. At that point, the name "vacating" (furog) is applied to the reality. However, in this permissible case, I said that if the tenant is the one taking it, it is only if the owner of the house is the landlord or the tenant. But this tenant does not deserve this vacating fee unless the landlord agrees to it, except in the case where there was a prior agreement between the landlord and the tenant that he has the right to vacate the place in what...
...the previous place is closed, and this shop is announced as available for rent. Then the tenant comes first of all and says to him: "My vacating fee is such-and-such thousand." Today, the vacating fee has become, in many cases in some countries, more than the value of the property. So he says to him: "The vacating fee is such-and-such thousand, and the annual rent is two, three, or five thousand." This is undoubtedly a type of consuming people's wealth unjustly; because when he says: "My vacating fee is such-and-such," it is empty talk. The shop is empty. When our fathers, grandfathers, and the early Muslims rented a place, this renting justified their benefiting from the vacancy of this place. But now, it is an innovation in transactions that renting alone justifies a person benefiting from the rented place, the rented property, to the extent that the landlord hands over what they call the vacating fee. The vacating fee is present and existing; no, this came about because of the material life lived by the disbelievers who have no mercy, and no such thing as a benevolent loan, or compassion, or justice. So we adopted it from them and began to deal with their transactions. This type of vacating fee is undoubtedly a form of consuming people's wealth unjustly, and this is prohibited by the explicit text of the Noble Qur'an.
Other than that?
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.