We planned on going to the mountains for the summer. In compliance with the owner’s demand, I paid half of the rental fee as a deposit. A few days before we were scheduled to leave, one of my children was hospitalized, which forced us to cancel our plans.

Q: Do we remain obligated to pay the full bungalow rental if the owner cannot find a replacement for us? Additionally, are we entitled to a refund of the deposit?

A: As a general rule, if an employer terminates an employment agreement due to circumstances that could not have been anticipated, the employee is only paid for the work that he did. He does not receive remuneration for the work that he ended up not doing, despite the resulting loss of income.

Poskim (C.M. 334:1) debate whether this principle applies to a parallel situation between a landlord and tenant. In this case, the tenant (who pays) is comparable to the employer and the landlord (who is paid), to the employee. According to one opinion, if the tenant died in the middle of the lease, his heirs are not obligated to make the remaining payments due on the lease. Since oness - circumstances beyond their control - occurred, the loss is suffered by the landlord.

Others disagree and contend that renting a house is considered a purchase of the usage rights for the period of the lease, sechirus l’yomei memkar. If one purchased a house and it collapsed shortly afterward, he is still obligated to pay for the house. Similarly, since for the period of the lease, usage of the house is “sold” to the tenant, he or his heirs must pay for that “purchase” in full, even if it is no longer needed or available.

Shach (334:2) rules that the tenant is not obligated to pay for the remaining time, though the landlord is not obligated to return rent the tenant paid in advance. Paying in advance demonstrates consent that the money will not be refunded even if circumstances render the object unavailable. But this rationale does not apply if the tenant paid in advance due to the landlord’s demands; the tenant might be able to demand a refund of the unused money. (See, however, Erech Shai.)

In the final analysis, though, since your landlord has possession of the money (muchzak) he can claim that there aren’t sufficient halachic grounds to refute the second opinion, which maintains that the tenant is obligated to pay the remainder of the lease even if he didn’t pay in advance. Therefore, you do not have to pay for the remaining rental, but he is not required to refund your money.