For the tenant is entitled to demand that the landlord carry out the repairs the premises require and which the contract obliges him to undertake.

These repairs are obligatory on two grounds: the rights of the endowment’s beneficiaries and the rights of the tenant. Scholars agree that the administrator of an endowment may not neglect the repairs to which the tenant is entitled. Neglecting these two duties makes him liable for whatever is lost through his negligence. He must compensate the endowment for its lost property, including the benefits of use to which the tenant was entitled. This differs from the case in which the property itself remains intact: the tenant may then hold him liable for those benefits, and he may terminate the lease. As for the loss of life and the destruction of the tenant’s property through negligence, he is liable on these three grounds. He is also liable for losses suffered by the neighbours on the first ground, as held by the great majority of scholars.

He was asked:

Concerning funds endowed for ransoming captives: if money is borrowed to secure their release, leaving the captives personally liable for debts they cannot repay, may those debts be paid from the endowment? Likewise, what if the person responsible for securing their release borrows the money at the direction of the endowment’s administrator or someone else?

He answered:

Yes, that is permissible. Indeed, this is a better way to secure the captives’ release than giving money in advance to someone to ransom those particular captives, for that money is at risk and may be spent