- Reconciliation between husband and wife when discord is feared.
- Peacemaking between two people who are quarreling over something other than property.
- Peacemaking between two people who are disputing over property—and this is the subject under discussion here.
This kind of reconciliation itself is divided into two categories:
first: a settlement that follows an admission;
second: a settlement that follows a denial.
1 Reconciliation that follows an admission is of two further kinds: one that involves the same type of property as the original claim, and one that involves something different.
A settlement involving the same type of property would be, for example, when a person acknowledges a fixed debt or admits that a particular item in his possession belongs to the claimant, then agrees that the claimant may take part of the debt and waive the rest, or may receive a gift of part of the item while the defendant keeps the remainder.
This form of reconciliation is valid so long as it was not made a condition of the admission itself—for instance, if the debtor were to say, “I acknowledge the debt on condition that you give me such-and-such or compensate me with such-and-such,” or if the creditor were to say, “I release you from the debt” or “I give it to you as a gift on condition that you give me such-and-such.” A settlement framed in this way is invalid, because the creditor retains the right to demand the entire amount.
For this kind of settlement to be valid it is also required that the creditor not be deprived of his right without it; otherwise it would amount to consuming another’s wealth unlawfully, which is forbidden, since the debtor is obliged to hand over what he owes unconditionally.
Another condition for validity is that the creditor must be someone who is legally competent to make a gift; if he is not, the settlement is invalid, just as if he were