Is it permissible for the establishment to obligate the pharmacist to guarantee the trust (custody) and to pay the value of any deficit in the inventory, and is the money taken from him lawful for them, knowing that he is trustworthy and is only liable if he is negligent or commits a transgression?

The ruling concerning a special employee – meaning one who is hired for a specific period – is that he is not liable for damages unless he transgresses, according to the majority of scholars. This is the position of the Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi'is, and Hanbalis. However, if he transgresses, then liability is obligatory by consensus, because he caused the damage through his transgression. Based on this, if a theft occurs, or something is lost, or a defect arises without transgression or negligence on the part of the employee, he is not liable for damages.