Ruling 2183. A person who gives something on rent (muʾjir) and a person who takes something on rent (mustaʾjir) must be of the age of legal responsibility (bāligh) and sane (ʿāqil). They must also enter into the rental agreement of their own volition (ikhtiyār) and have right of disposal over their property. Therefore, someone who is foolish with finances (safīh)[281] cannot rent anything nor give anything on rent as he does not have right of disposal over his property. Similarly, someone who has been proclaimed bankrupt (mufallas) cannot give on rent any property over which he does not have disposal, nor can he rent anything with that property. However, he can give himself on hire [as a worker].

Ruling 2184. A person may be an agent (wakīl) for another party to give property on rent for him or to rent property for him.

Ruling 2185. If the guardian (walī) or custodian of a child gives the child’s property on rent or hires the child [as a worker] to another person, there is no problem. If the hire agreement includes a period wherein the child is bāligh, the child can annul the remaining period of the hire agreement once he becomes bāligh, even though had the hire agreement not included a period wherein the child was bāligh, it would not have been in the child’s interest. However, if annulling the remaining period is contrary to interests that are required by Islamic law to be protected – i.e. interests which we know the Holy Legislator [Allah] would not be pleased with were they to be disregarded – then, if the hiring was done with the permission of a fully qualified jurist (al‑ḥākim al‑sharʿī), the child cannot annul the contract once he reaches the age of legal responsibility (bulūgh).

Ruling 2186. It is not allowed to give on hire a minor (ṣaghīr) who does not have a guardian without authorisation from a jurist (mujtahid).[1] As for someone who does not have access to a jurist, he can obtain authorisation from a dutiful (ʿādil) believer and give the child on hire.

Ruling 2187. It is not necessary for the lessor and the lessee to say a particular formula (ṣīghah) [for a rental agreement to be valid (ṣaḥīḥ), nor does it have to be] in Arabic; rather, if the owner says to someone [in English, for example], ‘I rent my property to you’, and the other person says, ‘I accept’, the rental agreement is valid. In fact, even if they do not say anything and the owner simply hands over the property to the lessee with the intention (qaṣd) of giving his property on rent to him, and the lessee accepts it with the intention of renting it, the rental agreement is valid.

Ruling 2188. If a person wishes to be hired for a particular task without saying a formula, the hire agreement is valid the moment he engages himself in that task.

Ruling 2189. If a person who is unable to speak conveys by sign that he has given some property on rent or he has rented some property, the rental agreement is valid.

Ruling 2190.* If a person leases a house, shop, or anything else, and the owner stipulates a condition that only he can use it, the lessee cannot sublet it to anyone else to use unless the new rental agreement is such that the use of the property is especially for the lessee, such as when a woman rents a house or a room and later gets married and gives the house or room on rent to her husband for her own residence there. But, if the owner does not stipulate a condition [that only the lessee can make use of it], then the lessee can sublet it to another person. When handing the property over to the second lessee, the first lessee must, based on obligatory precaution (al‑iḥtiyāṭ al‑wājib), obtain authorisation from the owner. However, if the first lessee wishes to give it on rent for a higher rental fee than what he has rented it for, then even though the payment may be in a different commodity, in the event that the property is a house, shop, or ship, he must do some work on it, such as making some repairs or doing some plastering, or he must have suffered a loss in looking after the property. And based on obligatory precaution, the additional rental fee must be commensurate with the work done or the loss suffered.

Ruling 2191. If a person who is hired to do something (ajīr) stipulates a condition that he will only work for the person who has hired him, he cannot be hired to someone else except in the way mentioned in the previous ruling. However, if he does not stipulate a condition [that he will only work for the person who has hired him], then the hirer can hire him to another person. However, what he gets for hiring him out must not be more than what he has agreed with him. The same applies if he himself is hired by someone and he then hires someone else to do the work for a lesser amount. However, if he does some of the work himself, he can hire someone else for a lesser amount.

Ruling 2192. If a person rents something other than a house, shop, or ship – for example, he rents some land – and the owner does not stipulate a condition that only he must use it, then, if he gives it on rent for an amount that is higher than what he has rented it for, the validity of the rental agreement is problematic (maḥall al‑ishkāl) [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, it is not valid].[2]

Ruling 2193. If a person rents a house or a shop for one year for £10,000, for example, and he makes use of half of it himself, he can give the other half on rent for £10,000. However, if he wishes to give the other half on rent for an amount higher than what he rented it for, for example £12,000, he must do some work on it, such as making some repairs.