Is one oath sufficient when multiple claimants assert a right against one defendant?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Judiciary
Primary text
If a right belonging to a group is established by a single oath taken by the defendant, this is permissible, and their claim is settled by that oath, because the right belongs to them collectively, and just as a single piece of evidence can establish a right for a group, a single oath can extinguish it with their consent. However, there is an alternative view that a separate oath is required for each claimant because an oath is proof pertaining to one person, and two people sharing a single oath results in an incomplete proof for each.
Supporting text
The correct position is that since the right belongs to them jointly, their consent to a single oath validates it, analogous to how a single piece of evidence can establish a right for multiple parties. If the defendant swears a single oath without the claimants' consent, the oath is invalid without dispute.