The ruling on one who enters into a contract knowing it is defective
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
I heard you in the Haram about two years ago saying: If a person knows that a contract is defective and enters into it, his actions are like the actions of a usurper. Then, was it reported to one of the two brothers that you issue a ruling to the contrary?The Shaykh: What is it? Like what?The questioner: I mean, if a person enters into a defective contract knowing it is defective, such as after the second call to Friday prayer, are his actions like those of a usurper regarding liability?The Shaykh: The school of thought holds: if he performs a defective action, such as selling to a person who has committed a sin after the second call, the contract is invalid, and they consider his action like the action of a usurper.
The questioner: Is he liable for compensation, O Shaykh?The Shaykh: For everything, for whatever resulted from the original act, he is liable. But there is another opinion that it is not so.
The questioner: Which one do you consider stronger, O Shaykh?The Shaykh: Each case must be examined individually. It may be appropriate to treat him as a usurper, and if the item is damaged, he compensates for the rental fee. It may also be appropriate not to do so. Each case is judged on its own merits.
The questioner: Is he liable for compensation, O Shaykh?The Shaykh: For everything, for whatever resulted from the original act, he is liable. But there is another opinion that it is not so.
The questioner: Which one do you consider stronger, O Shaykh?The Shaykh: Each case must be examined individually. It may be appropriate to treat him as a usurper, and if the item is damaged, he compensates for the rental fee. It may also be appropriate not to do so. Each case is judged on its own merits.