recover it from his estate without restriction and without his permission. If he has no entitlement to it, however, he may not take anything without his permission. And Allah knows best.

He was asked:

A man appointed another man as his agent with unrestricted authority, on the understanding that he would act only in his best interests and to his advantage. The agent then leased out land whose rental value was ten thousand for five thousand. Is this lease valid or not? If it is valid, is the agent liable for the difference?

He answered:

Praise be to Allah. The agent has no right to lease it out at such a disadvantageous rate. The owner may hold the negligent agent liable for the loss he has caused him.

As for the validity of the lease, most jurists consider it void. This is the position of al-Shāfi‘ī and, according to one of his two opinions, Ahmad. However, if the tenant was misled and did not know the agent’s true position—for example, if he thought that he was the owner and knew the property’s value—then, according to the sounder of the two scholarly opinions, he may recover whatever he becomes liable for from the person who misled him.

His crop is legally protected and may not be cut down without compensation; rather, it is left in place subject to the customary rent, with a disparity beyond what people ordinarily tolerate. Here he is acting wrongfully, and his crop is treated as that of a usurper. May the owner uproot it without compensation? There are two well-known scholarly opinions on this. And may he acquire ownership of it