What is the ruling when a party makes an initial unqualified acknowledgment, followed by a qualifying statement (e.g., debt becoming a deposit)?

Primary text

This applies to cases such as saying, 'I have a thousand units,' and then saying, 'It is a deposit,' or saying, 'I owe it,' and then saying, 'It is a deposit,' or saying, 'I hold collateral for him,' and the owner says, 'It is a deposit.' This also applies to partners, investment managers (*mudharib*), and those denying a claim. If they disagree on the value of the collateral, the amount of the debt secured by the collateral, or similar issues, the oath is administered to the party whose statement is taken as definitive over his opponent, based on the Hadith: 'If people were given what they claimed, some people would claim the blood and wealth of others, but the oath belongs to the defendant.'