the position of the school, the judgment is invalid. It must be established that this sale was concluded by legally competent parties and with all its conditions fulfilled. The correct view, however, is that it is valid. Yet the party against whom judgment was given—the owner of the land—may claim that one of the conditions was absent or that an impediment existed. For example, he may say: “Yes, I sold this land to him, but he had not seen it.” One of the conditions for the validity of a sale involving land and the like is that the item sold be seen. In this case, we say: This is a new claim, and the presumption is validity unless evidence of invalidity is established. Thus, we say: The sale was concluded, and the presumption concerning it is that it is valid; it cannot be overturned.

Likewise, if he claims that an impediment existed, saying: “Yes, I sold it to him, but it was after the second call to the Friday prayer.” A sale concluded after the second call to the Friday prayer by one upon whom the Friday prayer is obligatory is invalid.

We say: This is a new claim, and the presumption is validity and the absence of any impediment.

The point is that this fifth condition of a claim is subject to disagreement. According to the school, the conditions must be stated, whereas the correct view is that this is not a condition. This was the view chosen by the author of the foundational text upon which this book is based—that is, al-Muqniʿ—namely al-Muwaffaq Abu Muhammad Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Qudamah, d. 620 AH, one of the leading scholars of the school; it was also the view of the commentator on al-Muqniʿ.

Some scholars have drawn a distinction, holding that the conditions must be stated in a marriage contract, but not in other contracts, such as sale, lease, mortgage, and the like. The correct view is that there is no distinction: whoever claims a contract and produces evidence for it is entitled to judgment in accordance with that evidence, for the presumption is validity and freedom from defect.