What is the ruling when the dispute over the nature of the contract occurs after a period for which payment is due, and the owner claims it was leased?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Loan for Use
Primary text
The statement of the owner prevails along with their oath. This position is related to the stance of Malik. However, the proponents of *Ahl al-Ra'y* and Al-Shafi'i state that the rider's assertion prevails because both parties agree that the benefit ('manafi') was consumed under the rider's possession, and the owner is claiming compensation for it, whereas the original status is that no compensation is due, hence the rider's exemption prevails.
Supporting text
The prevailing legal proof supports the owner's assertion because the dispute concerns the manner in which the benefits transferred to the rider's ownership, similar to disputes over the object itself. Furthermore, since the benefits cannot transfer without the owner's conveyance, the owner's statement regarding the mode of transfer prevails, requiring the owner to swear an oath to claim the rent.