is that both accounts are plausible, or that the hirer’s account is plausible but the owner’s is not. (The second) is that neither party’s account is plausible. (The third) is that the owner’s account alone is plausible.

In the first case, where both accounts are plausible or the hirer’s account alone is plausible, both parties swear oaths, and the hire contract is rescinded for the disputed portion of the journey. The hire charge is apportioned over the whole distance, and the owner is entitled to the share corresponding to the destination on which they agree. The hirer may ride to that destination if their disagreement arises before they reach it. This differs from the ruling governing the parties to a fixed-term house lease. The same ruling applies if both refuse to swear. If one swears and the other refuses, the account of the party who swears is accepted. If the hirer is the one who refuses to swear, the owner is entitled to the entire hire charge for the distance he acknowledges. If the owner is the one who refuses, the hirer may ride as far as he claims.

In the second case, where neither party’s account is plausible, both swear oaths and rescind the contract for the disputed distance. The owner is entitled to the customary hire charge for the distance on which they agree. The same ruling also applies if both refuse to swear. If one refuses and the other swears, the account of the party who swears is accepted, even if it is implausible, because the other party, by refusing to swear, has enabled him to establish his claim.

In the third case, where the owner’s account alone is plausible, his account is accepted upon his swearing an oath in response to the hirer’s claim. If the owner refuses to swear, the hirer’s account is accepted, and he may ride as far as he claims, even if his account is implausible, because the owner has enabled him to do so by refusing to swear.

Section

If their disagreement over this arises after payment has been made, there are three possible cases. (The first) is that both accounts are plausible, or that the account of the owner, who received payment, is plausible. (The second) is that neither party’s account is plausible. (The third) is that the hirer’s account is plausible but the owner’s is not.

In the first case, where both accounts are plausible or the account of the owner, who received payment, is plausible, the owner’s account is accepted upon his oath. If he refuses to swear, the hirer swears, and his account is accepted: for the amount he has paid, he may ride to the destination he claims. In the second case, where neither party’s account is plausible, both swear oaths and rescind the contract with respect to