چکیده:
One of the topics worthy of investigation is the condition of the trustee's liability, because in the custom of society, in many fiduciary transactions, a condition for the trustee's liability is made. Therefore, it is necessary that the status of such a condition be clarified from a jurisprudential perspective. Jurisprudential theories in this regard can be summarized into three groups: first, the theory of the invalidity of the condition and the contract on the grounds that the condition contradicts the essence of the contract; second, the theory of the invalidity of the condition because the condition of the trustee's liability is a condition contrary to the Book and the Sunnah; third, the theory of the validity of the condition, because there is no evidence for the invalidity of such a condition, and what has been said regarding the invalidity of the condition or the contract due to the condition is not applicable.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Given what has been said, although the primary ruling in Islamic jurisprudence regarding a legitimate disposer of another's property is trust (aman), and they are only liable if their transgression or negligence is proven, in the social custom (urf), in many cases, the owner does not settle for the fiduciary responsibility of the disposer; rather, through an implicit and customary condition or a personal condition, the owner explicitly states the responsibility and guarantee of the trustee and makes them liable for the property being disposed of.
Therefore, considering the prevalence of the condition of guaranteeing the trustee in society in the aforementioned cases on one hand, and the primary ruling of Islamic jurisprudence regarding the non-liability of the trustee unless their transgression or negligence is proven on the other hand, it is necessary to examine whether the condition of guaranteeing the trustee, which is common in custom, is valid, or whether the ruling of the trustee's fiduciary status is among the peremptory (amira) rulings, making any contrary condition a violation of the Book and the Sunnah.
This reason has been contested because the absence of liability or trust, for instance in a lease contract (ijarah), is not the inherent effect of the contract such that, in the event of a guarantee condition, the condition would be considered contrary to the essence of the contract and cause the nullity of the contract (Imam Khomeini, p.
(
, 
, 
)
