Section: When a defect arises while the item is in the buyer’s hands

If something the buyer purchased develops a defect after coming into his possession—whether through his own action or for some other reason—and he then discovers another defect that had already existed while the object was with the seller, the ruling is as follows:

1. Should the defect that occurred with the buyer be slight and cause only a negligible loss in value—such as a slave’s mild fever, a passing headache, slight conjunctivitis, a small surface crack, a light cauterisation mark, or any non-serious pain—he may return the item to the seller on account of the earlier defect, with the price reduced only in proportion to that earlier defect, and he owes nothing further.

2. If the defect that arose under the buyer’s care does diminish the price but is not considered ruinous, he may still return the item; however, he must reimburse the seller for the depreciation caused by that new defect.

3. If the defect that developed with the buyer is ruinous, he may not return the item. Instead, he is entitled merely to the compensatory allowance (arsh) for the pre-existing defect, and he must keep the slave. Some jurists hold that, even in the case of a ruinous defect, the buyer has a choice: either to return the merchandise and pay for the depreciation caused by the later defect, or to keep it and claim the arsh for the hidden defect that pre-dated the sale.

This ruling applies to slaves whether or not the seller engaged in deception; in their view, slaves are treated differently from other goods in this respect.

As for a person who sells a piece of cloth and the buyer then cuts it