Question Summary:
Price of commodity not agreed upon

Question Detail:

Person A is getting Qurbani animals from Person B on the insistence of Person B to buy from him. After the Qurbani animals have been delivered, only then is the price given at whatever rate Person B demands. No price is fixed or discussed before hand.
Is such a transaction valid according to Sharia? 

Answer :

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.
The commercial system of Shari’ah is based on mutual consent and agreement. This is in order to maintain a harmonious business environment based on trust, faith and goodwill. Any such factors that defeat this purpose are looked down upon and often affect the status of the particular transaction. Shari’ah advocates that a transaction be carried out in a manner which does not lead to disputes. As such, Shar’ah prohibits a number of trade practices which merely have the potential of leading to disputes.
It has become common practice that on the basis of the buyer and seller beings friends or acquaintances, commodities are traded without any specific price mentioned. The price is then later agreed. This is in total conflict with the financial system of Shari’ah. The matter is aggravated by the practice becoming even more common during the days of ‘Eid when Muslims look towards purchasing livestock from farmers. On one hand, Shari’ah advocates that one inculcate Taqwā whilst on the other hand, there is total neglect of it even in matters of ‘Ibādah.
With specific reference to the Qurbānī animal, Allāh states:
“It is neither their flesh nor their blood that reaches Allāh, but it is the Taqwā from you that reaches Him.” (22:37)
It is evident from this that the basis of the acceptance of one’s Qurbānī is neither the animal nor its meat and blood, rather it is purely the Taqwā that one exercises in the entire process of acquiring, rearing and sacrificing the animal. Further, the history of Qurbānī highlights that the inception of Qurbānī was from the total obedience of Allāh that Hadrat Ibrāhīm ‘Alayhis Salaam exhibited.
Having understood that, one can take a cursory glance at the trade practices prevalent in the days leading up to the day of ‘Eid and understand where we stand in terms of Taqwa and the obedience of Allāh. A practice that hinges purely upon these two factors has become totally bereft of them, not forgetting the numerous quarrels and arguments regarding the deal that spring up later on. How can one’s Qurbānī gain acceptance in the court of Allāh? Where is the spirituality in such a Qurbānī?
In reference to your query, one of the fundamental conditions for the validity of a sale is the mutual agreement of both parties on the price of the commodity.[1] Prior to the sale, if the seller demands a price which the buyer is not prepared to pay, the buyer has the option of rejecting the deal, regardless of whether the animals have been delivered or not. If he refuses to pay the price, no transaction has taken place. The mere delivery of the animals will not be regarded as a sale. The seller may not force the buyer to purchase the animals. If the buyer decides to pay the price at his own will, then the sale will be valid and only take place at that time.
If the buyer agreed to purchase the animals but a price was not agreed, then too such a transaction is invalid.[2] The transaction will have to be carried out again upon a price that is agreeable to both parties.[3] If the animals are destroyed, lost, run away, etc. whilst in the buyer’s possession, he will be responsible for reimbursing the seller with the market value of the animals.[4]
However, if the buyer took possession of the animals in order to have a look at them and then decide whether he will purchase them or not, but had not agreed to purchase them as yet and the price too was not discussed, then no transaction has taken place. If the buyer was negligent in looking after them, then he will be liable for any loss or damage to the animals. In such a situation, the buyer will be liable to pay the market value of the animals and not the price.[5] If he was not negligent in doing so, he will not be liable.
Similarly, if the buyer decided to purchase the animals and took possession of them due to that but the price was not agreed, he will only be liable for any damage or loss if he was negligent in looking after the animals.[6]
Hereunder is a summary of the three scenarios mentioned above, taking into consideration that no price has been discussed when taking possession of the animals or prior to that:
 

Scenario

Ruling

The deal has been concluded without agreeing on the price of the animal

In the case of the loss or damage to the animal, the buyer will be responsible for the market value, whether or not he was negligent in looking after the animal

The buyer is prepared to purchase the animal and has taken possession of the animal but the price has not been discussed

In the case of the loss or damage to the animal, the buyer will only be responsible if he was negligent in looking after the animal

The buyer has taken possession of the animal to merely see the animal and then will decide whether to purchase the animal or not

In the case of the loss or damage to the animal, the buyer will only be responsible if he was negligent in looking after the animal