Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(116): “Sharia Ruing on Paying a Compensation to Partners“

Date Added : 28-10-2015

 

Resolution No.(116): “Sharia Ruing on Paying a Compensation to Partners“

Date: 4/9/1427 AH, corresponding to 27/9/2006 AD.

 

The Board received the following question:

In 1999, a person assumed operating a land in which he was a partner and which was irrigated free by a natural flow of a spring water. In 1994, the Water Authority of Jordan drew out its water shares in that spring in order to deliver them to residential areas. As a result, he was forced to purchase plastic pipes and a generator to pump the water to his land. In 2001, he and his partners filed a suit against the Water Authority of Jordan because of the harm inflicted on them. However, his partners didn`t cover any expenses concerning that lawsuit because the lawyer was supposed to receive a percentage from the compensation, so he had to cover all the expenses on his own. After filing that suit, his partners proposed selling their shares in that land to him, and he agreed and the deal was concluded. In February of 2006, the court ruled that the Water Authority of Jordan pays a compensation to the land owners because its value as irrigated land differed from its value as unirrigated land. On its part, the Water Authority of Jordan did pay the compensation and ordered the Lands Registration Department to transfer that land from irrigated into unirrigated. Is that person entitled to take that compensation for himself because he is the only one who was inflicted with harm while operating the land and after purchasing it as it was changed from irrigated into unirrigated, or is that compensation the right of all his partners?

Answer: All success is due to Allah

The Board is of the view that all partners are entitled to receive the compensation, and the above person`s purchase of their shares doesn`t deny them their right in the compensation since he did so after the suit was filed.

Besides, his partners sold him their shares after the price of the land had decreased. However, the Board sees that he is entitled to claim the costs, which he paid for buying the plastic pipes and the generator, from them. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

The Iftaa' Board

        Chairman of The Iftaa' Board

            Chief Justice/ Dr.Ahmad Hlyaal

                    Sheikh AbdelKareem Al-Khasawneh

Dr. Yousef Ali  Ghythan

                                                                 Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri

                                                                 Sheikh Saeed Hijawii

Sheikh Naeem Mujahid

                                                                 Dr. Yaser Al-Shamali

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Who is "the poor" entitled to receive Zakah (obligatory charity)?

The poor is the one who has neither money nor a source of living, or has either of them, but it isn`t sufficient such as being in need for a hundred/JDs, and having an income of forty/JDs only.

What is incumbent upon the one offering the sacrifice if, after slaughtering the animal, they discover that one of its internal organs is damaged or diseased?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The presence of disease or defect in the internal organs of a sheep does not affect the validity of the sacrificial animal, unless the disease leads to the animal becoming emaciated and its meat becoming corrupted.
 
It is stated in al-Iqnā' (2/590) by Imam al-Shirbīnī: "The third disqualifying condition: an animal with a manifest illness — meaning one whose illness visibly results in emaciation and corruption of its meat. However, if the illness is minor and does not produce such effects, it doesn`t affect the validity of the sacrificed animal." And Allah Almighty knows best.

I broke my oath and am now obligated to pay the expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn). Would it be valid to fulfill this by inviting the poor and needy to a meal for them to eat from?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn) is given to the poor (fuqarā') and needy (masākīn), and it must be given in the form of ownership (tamlīk) transferred to them of the required amount — namely, one mudd of the staple food of the locality, or its equivalent monetary value. It isn`t valid to invite the poor or needy to a meal prepared for them to eat from, as this does not constitute "ownership" (tamlīk) but merely "permission to partake" (ibāḥah).
Imam al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What is intended is that ownership be transferred to them; therefore, providing them with lunch or dinner [as a meal to eat from] isn`t valid." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muhtāj,Vol. 5/P.50]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.