While most laws stem from the Sages' logic presented in the Gemmorah, there is a subset of Halochos called Hukim (decrees) that are to be taken without understanding their reasoning.
Are there Hukim in monetary laws, between a Jew and his fellow?
While most laws stem from the Sages' logic presented in the Gemmorah, there is a subset of Halochos called Hukim (decrees) that are to be taken without understanding their reasoning.
Are there Hukim in monetary laws, between a Jew and his fellow?
Compiling some answers from the comments to the OP (feel free to add more):
One of the concepts of torts in Jewish law is גרמא בניזקין, which refers to an action that indirectly causes damage.
According to Jewish law, גרמא בנזקין פטור (Bava Kamma 60a), the tortious person is not liable for such damages, and the Beis Din will not charge him for them.
Nevertheless, the Talmud (Bava Basra 22b) teaches that גרמא בניזקין אסור, a person is prohibited from causing such types of damage, and while Beis Din doesn't obligate for such damages, the Heavenly court will punish the person, פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים.
תניא, אמר ר' יהושע, ארבעה דברים העושה אותן פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים, ואלו הן: הפורץ גדר בפני בהמת חבירו, והכופף קמתו של חבירו בפני הדליקה, והשוכר עדי שקר להעיד, והיודע עדות לחבירו ואינו מעיד לו
It follows that it's incumbent upon the person to oblige the laws of heaven, and to pay the damage, and until he does so, the sin will not be forgiven.
This is seemingly a paradox. If he's guilty in Heaven, then why doesn't Beis Din enforce payment?
For further discussion of this issue, see here: קימ"ל שגרמא פטור האם יש סברה לזה ?
Bava Kama 45b: R. Yehuda is of the opinion that a שור מועד, an ox that is identified as being likely to gore someone/something, needs less guarding than a שור תם, a regular ox.