What is the legal determination when the wording was 'I have assigned to you' (Ahaltuka), and the parties dispute whether it was a formal assignment (Hawala) or agency (Wakala) using the term Hawala?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Assignment (Transfer of Debt)
Primary text
If the parties agree the creditor said, 'I have assigned to you' (Ahaltuka), and they dispute whether it was a formal assignment or agency stated using the language of assignment, the ruling is definitively in favor of the claimant of assignment (Hawala). This is because assignment based on an existing debt ('bidaynika') inherently cannot be interpreted as mere agency; thus, the claim of agency is not accepted. Furthermore, the statement 'I have assigned to you your debt' constitutes an admission of the debt, which the speaker cannot subsequently deny.
Supporting text
If the creditor stated only 'I have assigned to you' (Ahaltuka) and then denied the debt, claiming only agency was intended, there are two differing views on whether this constitutes an admission of the underlying debt if the assignee claims it was a formal assignment of a pre-existing debt.