Topic: The Tur’s ruling that פשרה requires a קניין, the question of why the claimant needs a קניין, and the dispute between the RiD and the Rosh.

Topic: Why פשרה requires a קניין from both parties, even though ordinary מחילה — forgiving a debt — may not require a קניין.

Topic: The second issue in Choshen Mishpat 12:7 — why פשרה requires a קנין, a formal act of legal commitment, whereas ordinary judgment does not.

Topic: The first issue in Choshen Mishpat 12:7 — how many judges are needed to make a binding פשרה?

Topic: The prohibition against forcing another person into a compromise by delaying payment or withholding property that rightfully belongs to him.

Topic: The authority of a dayan to rule “like a compromise” when the facts cannot be fully clarified and a strict ruling would be unreliable.

Topic: The authority of Beit Din to make a compromise involving orphans’ property, even without the orphans’ consent, when it is for their benefit.

Topic: The Rema’s discussion of whether Beit Din can compel someone to act לפנים משורת הדין — beyond the strict letter of the law.

Topic: Even after גמר דין — the final ruling — compromise may still be possible in certain ways: through someone outside Beit Din, to avoid an oath, or through a fully voluntary agreement between the parties.

Topic: The Shulchan Aruch on the mitzvah to offer פשרה — compromise — the need for fairness within compromise, and the dispute over how late compromise may still be offered.