Author Topic: The Divine Code Daily Dose  (Read 3993 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #175 on: November 07, 2018, 04:29:56 PM »
If they agree to make a compromise, that is preferable to making a judgment, but the litigants are not obligated to accept the compromise that the judge will make unless they made a commitment to do so.

Even though it is a righteous practice to make a compromise, if the judge recognizes that there is a real theft or exploitation committed by the defendant, it is a preferred righteous practice to save the exploited person from the hand of the one who exploited him. Therefore, the judge should make an unequivocal judgment, and he should not make a compromise that will cause loss to the exploited and an unfair gain to the exploiter. Only if he has no ability at all to pass judgment and fairness against the wicked person and remove the theft (the stolen goods or payment) from his hands, then he should make a compromise from lack of any better available choice (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 688-689). 

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #176 on: November 08, 2018, 04:15:30 PM »
Just as the judge must create equality between the two litigants and listen to their words equally, so too in a compromise. The compromise that the judge suggests must be equal, and not show preference to one side more than the other, because it says, "Justice, justice you shall pursue." In the doubled language of this verse, one directive for justice refers to justice in judgment, and the other directive for justice refers to justice in compromise (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 689).   

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #177 on: November 09, 2018, 06:38:24 PM »
Even after a litigant accepted a compromise in his demands and committed himself to the decision according to the legal procedure, if he finds a proof or testimony that was hidden from him at the time that they made the compromise, and the judgment should be changed in a substantial manner because of that proof, he may go back and change what he accepted because his compromise and his monetary waiver were made in error (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 689). 

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #178 on: November 11, 2018, 08:18:00 AM »
Similarly if the judge erred in the compromise with a very big error that leaned the judgment of the compromise to one side in a manner that was not appropriate, the litigant who lost out may appeal and bring it to judgment again (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 689-690). 

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #179 on: November 12, 2018, 03:16:50 PM »
Two litigants are permitted to arrange for themselves one arbitrator or a number of arbitrators who will hear their case and pass judgment. It seems to me that arbitration (by Gentiles) is a subcategory of making a compromise which is part of the commandment of Dinim, and just as the judge is obligated to try to make a compromise as explained above, similarly, if the litigants agree to make a compromise between themselves either on their own or through an arbitrator whom they both accept, then this is compared to a compromise arranged by a judge; i.e., it is considered to have fulfilled the commandment of Dinim (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 690). 

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #180 on: November 13, 2018, 02:06:44 PM »
That which has been explained in Sheva Mizvot HaShem, Part VIII, Chapter 5, that the regular court should force the two litigants to be judged before it, this applies when one of them or both of them do not want to be judged in any form of law (not in a court, not by a compromise, and not by arbitrators). But if they both agree to a compromise or to arbitration, then that is their prerogative and they are not forced to be judged by the law (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 690). 

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #181 on: November 14, 2018, 05:37:54 PM »
Arbitration is similar to a compromise in that they both need binding acceptance, because otherwise each side could renege on it. It is proper that each side should find for himself one arbitrator to be like a judge, and if they want, a third arbitrator as a judge, then they should choose a third arbitrator by mutual agreement, or they should grant permission to the two arbitrators who were already selected to choose for themselves a third arbitrator. The two sides should then write up a document of arbitration in which each side obligates himself to accept this arbitration as binding. And after they do this, neither side is able to disagree with these arbitrators or with their conclusion, or to demand that additional arbitrators be added on to the three (with the exception of situations in which an error in the judgment is discovered, as mentioned above in topic 5) (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 690-691). 

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #182 on: November 16, 2018, 12:29:15 AM »
Even though the process of arbitration is like reaching a compromise, it is similar to judgment (with the agreement of the litigants), in that the arbitrators are discussing between themselves how to judge and decide between the litigants. Therefore, all the prohibitions that apply to the judge in order to prevent perversion of justice also apply to the arbitrator; for example he is not allowed to take a bribe which will distort the judgment, and the arbitrator should not listen to the words of one litigant when not in the presence of his opponent (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 691). 

Online Hrvatski Noahid

  • Senior JTFer
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
Re: The Divine Code Daily Dose
« Reply #183 on: Today at 03:00:02 AM »
Any payment to an arbitrator for his service of arbitration needs to be given by each side equally, because otherwise it would be a case of bribery and distortion in favor of one side (the Divine Code by Rabbi Moshe Weiner, Ask Noah International, 2018, p 691).