Hi.there is a din that asmachta lo kania.
That’s why bets are void because we say that the better only agreed to the bet because he was sure he’s gonna win.

If a contract was signed for selling a dira, with lawyers and all,and it says that if one party voids and cancels the contract, then he must reimburse the other party for 10% of the deals worth.

That’s not an asmachta under any stance,right?


In principle a fine that is unrelated to damage, such as paying large amounts for a breach of contract, can often be considered an asmachta, and therefore one must be careful in writing up a contract to include clauses that render the terms valid. See Bava Metzia 104a, Shut Ha-Rashba 1:933, and Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 207.

Therefore, the question of asmachta in this matter depends on whether the contract was written up in a way that solves the issue of asmachta.

It is noteworthy that the Aruch Ha-Shulchan (207:3) writes that where the agreement has validity based on the Law of the Land, it follows that the terms will not be subject to the restrictions of asmachta – yet this is not agreed upon by all authorities (see Rema 207:15), and therefore the question of whether the clause is binding in Torah law remains open.

Best wishes.

Share The Knowledge

Not what you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged Contracts and agreements or ask your own question.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *