Is the custodian liable for the loss of the deposit if it perishes without his negligence or transgression?

General Chapter

Al-Mughni

Book of Deposits

Book 34 · Issue 4 · Bab 1

Open in Qurani

Primary text

The custodian is not liable for loss if it occurs without his negligence or transgression, regardless of whether other property belonging to the depositor was lost alongside it. This is the position held by the majority of scholars, including Abu Bakr, Ali, Ibn Mas'ud, Shurayh, al-Nakha'i, Malik, al-Zannad, al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, al-Shafi'i, and the Ashab al-Ra'y. The basis for this is that the item is an Amanah (trust), and liability (Daman) contradicts the nature of a trust. Furthermore, the Prophet stated: 'The custodian has no liability.'

Supporting text

A secondary narration from Ahmad states that if the deposit perishes mixed amongst the custodian's own property, he is liable, based on a report concerning 'Umar ibn al-Khattab holding Anas ibn Malik liable for a deposit that perished among his property. However, the primary view maintains that the narration regarding 'Umar is predicated on negligence by Anas.