Is the worker in a void Mudharabah liable for capital that is destroyed without his transgression or negligence?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Partnership
Primary text
The worker bears no liability (Daman) for capital destroyed without his transgression or negligence. That which is guaranteed in a valid contract is guaranteed in a void one, and that which is not guaranteed in the valid form is not guaranteed in the void one. This is the position of Ahmad and the majority of early scholars, including Al-Shafi'i. The reasoning is that since the contract, when void, becomes akin to a lease (Ijarah), and a lessee is not liable for destruction without fault, neither is the worker liable here. Furthermore, the original contract did not stipulate liability for the capital in the valid form.
Supporting text
Abu Yusuf and Muhammad held that the worker is liable. The counterargument to the analogy with a void partnership is that in a void partnership, the status is established differently. The majority view holds that since the valid form of Mudharabah does not entail liability for the capital, the void form likewise does not entail liability when destruction occurs without fault.