Is a subsequent statement nullifying a debt acknowledgment valid?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Acknowledgment of Rights
Primary text
If an acknowledgment of debt is followed immediately by a statement justifying why the debt should be voided, the original acknowledgment stands, and the subsequent nullifying statement is not accepted. This applies when one acknowledges owing a thousand based on the price of wine, pork, food that perished before possession, the price of a void sale that was not received, or a debt guaranteed with a condition of option (*khiyar*). Abu al-Khattab, Abu Hanifa, and one opinion of Al-Shafi'i hold this view.
Supporting text
Al-Qadi holds that if the acknowledgment is 'I owe a thousand counterfeit coins' and the person then explains that the coins were lead or copper, the explanation is not accepted because it negates the entire admission. However, in the other cases mentioned, Al-Qadi accepts the explanatory statement because the person attributes the debt to its cause, similar to attributing it to a valid cause.