The effect of retracting a declaration concerning property rights over another's asset, specifically when the declarant initially names one party and then retracts in favor of another.
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Acknowledgment of Rights
Primary text
If an individual declares, 'This house belongs to Zayd,' and then retracts saying, 'No, it belongs to 'Amr,' the ruling is in favor of Zayd. The declarant is then obligated to compensate 'Amr for the value thereof. This is the apparent view of one opinion from Al-Shafi'i. The reasoning is that the declarant separated 'Amr from his ownership, which he had acknowledged through his declaration to another, thus necessitating compensation for 'Amr, analogous to a situation where two witnesses retract their testimony regarding the manumission of a slave, or if one throws an object into the sea and then claims it.
Supporting text
The opposing view, held by Abu Hanifa, states that the declarant is not obligated to compensate 'Amr. This is because the declarant acknowledged something for 'Amr to which the ruling prevented acceptance, and this inability to accept the declaration does not impose a guarantee (Daman).