Comments on: Sydney Beth Din goes public following the 2-1 decision appeal against it https://www.jwire.com.au/sydney-beth-din-goes-public-following-the-2-1-decision-appeal-against-it/ Australia, NZ and worldwide Jewish news that matters Thu, 27 Dec 2018 15:55:54 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Lawrence Fleck https://www.jwire.com.au/sydney-beth-din-goes-public-following-the-2-1-decision-appeal-against-it/#comment-399103 Thu, 27 Dec 2018 15:55:54 +0000 http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=92923#comment-399103 It seems to me that the court is interfering in religious practice. Not only did the accused fail to appear, but he even sued the Beth Din.

]]> By: Avigael Cassel https://www.jwire.com.au/sydney-beth-din-goes-public-following-the-2-1-decision-appeal-against-it/#comment-399052 Thu, 27 Dec 2018 05:13:57 +0000 http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=92923#comment-399052 Who exactly is making this statement on behalf of Sydney Beth Din? Where is the original document detailing this – does not appear to be on their website? Did they sign and date this statement?

]]> By: david segal https://www.jwire.com.au/sydney-beth-din-goes-public-following-the-2-1-decision-appeal-against-it/#comment-399036 Thu, 27 Dec 2018 01:34:48 +0000 http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=92923#comment-399036 It is disturbing that the Sydney Beth Din (or any other religious organization) didn’t find any need to comment on the finding of the judge in the supreme court, that even that Rabbi
Gutnick agreed one should avoid private meetings or communications with parties, and it would be inappropriate to have one-on-one private meetings with a party in the absence of the other party. The same “generally” applied to private communications with a party, and the same “certainly” applied once a case had commenced, and Rabbi Ulman also accepted it would be inappropriate to have direct communications with one party not in the presence of the other, they had communications and were meeting with one side in the dispute.

See:

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/5a31d6a1e4b058596cbad0b1.

clauses 207-233

]]> By: Rabbi Pinchos Woolstone https://www.jwire.com.au/sydney-beth-din-goes-public-following-the-2-1-decision-appeal-against-it/#comment-398994 Wed, 26 Dec 2018 19:33:33 +0000 http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=92923#comment-398994 In reply to DAVID SINGER.

It can be assumed that the SBD will discuss the option of appealing to the High Court with its lawyers especially in light of the 2-1 decision.

]]> By: DAVID SINGER https://www.jwire.com.au/sydney-beth-din-goes-public-following-the-2-1-decision-appeal-against-it/#comment-398897 Wed, 26 Dec 2018 00:58:39 +0000 http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=92923#comment-398897 Seems to me to be an issue of great significance that leaves the Beth Din with no option but to seek leave to appeal to the High Court.

]]> By: ben gershon https://www.jwire.com.au/sydney-beth-din-goes-public-following-the-2-1-decision-appeal-against-it/#comment-398889 Tue, 25 Dec 2018 23:01:23 +0000 http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=92923#comment-398889 with costs legal rising by a bull headed Bait din .will it raise the price of kosher foods ?

what about the principle of “din hamalka”

these self appointed adjudicators of their own brand of Jewish law are bringing the clan into disrepute

]]>