For a claim to be admitted—or a denial to be accepted—the litigant must be legally competent: a free, accountable adult of sound judgment.

When two parties dispute ownership of a specific object, each asserting that it is his while the item is in the hand of one of them, judgment goes to the possessor once he swears an oath.

The party in whose hand the object is found is called the dākhil (“insider”), while the one without possession is called the khārij (“outsider”).

If each of them produces evidence that the disputed item is his, it is awarded to the outsider, based on the hadith narrated by Ibn ʿAbbās, traced back to the Prophet ﷺ: “Were people granted whatever they claimed, some would claim the lives and property of others; rather, the oath rests upon the defendant” (Ahmad and Muslim). This is further supported by his ﷺ saying: “The evidence is upon the plaintiff, and the oath is upon the one who denies” (al-Tirmidhī).

Together, these two hadiths establish that proof lies with the plaintiff; if he supplies it, the ruling is in his favor, and if he has no proof, the oath is required of the denier.

Most jurists, however, maintain that in this situation the object belongs to the one who holds it—the dākhil—and that the hadith concerns the case in which the possessor has no supporting evidence. Possession coupled with evidence is weightier, and the majority view is therefore preferable.