Real-Estate Transactions

o Drafting Contracts and Agreements – We accompany real estate transactions and specialize in complex transactions of different kinds, such as the representation of contractors and drafting contracts for their needs, representation of buyers in purchase transactions from a contractor, purchase and sale of private apartments, transfer without consideration, purchase of land lots, representation of entrepreneurs or tenants in the agreements related to National Master Plan No. 38 [TMA 38], Pinui Binui (demolition and reconstruction), combination transactions, plots' sales, handling real estate through a partnership, receivership, buying groups and overseas business transactions.

o Our firm has special expertise in representing tenants regarding TMA 38 (renovation), Pinui Binui (demolition and reconstruction) and their myriad aspects.

o Counseling and Initial Preparation for Testing Transaction's Feasibility – Our firm accompanies each transaction from the very start, where detailed advice is provided first and foremost in accordance with the client's needs and requirements, while adjusting the deal's layout to make it optimal for its eventual fruition, including, its economic aspect, building permits and various master plans applicable to the area, examining existing cellular phone towers, legal issues, banking support, corporate aspects and tax considerations (including calculation).

o Comprehensive Financial Handling and Support – Our staff lawyers, some of  whom have  background and undergraduate degrees in Business Administration, are ready to provide advice and assessments in the financial field, including the economic feasibility of the transaction, detecting the transaction's weak points, financial accompaniment while coping, in advance, with financial risks, interacting with the relevant financing organization till funding is secured, and providing ongoing financial support until the project is complete, including handling receipt of financing for an existing project.  Such handling is done with seamless correlation of our accompaniment of the project with the repayment ability of the entity receiving the loan, while maintaining optimal flexibility together with a dynamic approach as the process proceeds.

o  Providing the Transaction Complete Legal Envelope at Every Phase – Our involvement may begin from the start of the project's engagement, continuing with obtaining various permits from the relevant authorities concerning planning and construction, as well as routine interfacing with outside elements (e.g., municipal authorities) while providing real-time solutions to different needs arising from the transaction; when necessary, since we specialize in legal proceedings before different adjudicative bodies, we are able to judicially handle various legal matters arising as a result of the transaction.

o  Real Estate Taxation – The firm provides a complete platform for handling issues related to the taxation of both simple and complex real estate transactions, ranging from carrying out a transaction-based assessment (pursuant to its type)  prior to its closing, followed by the formulation of effective planning of tax strategy and on to representation before tax authorities and, when necessary and advisable, turning to legal action (for details, see extensive delineation at our Taxation Laws  page at our office Website).

o  Interaction with Authorities – Ongoing interaction with different authorities regarding, for instance, municipal charges and various fees, reports' submission, tax issues and land registration.  If and when necessary, our firm operates in conjunction with the courts on issues arising from the execution of such transactions (improvement, property tax, VAT, permits, etc.).  To that end, our firm is linked with a number of professionals, allowing it to obtain opinions, performance of applicable assessments, analysis and scrutiny.

o  Our firm handles the reduction of municipal charges and the sundry levies that would be charged to the transaction.

Amendment No. 2 to TMA 38 has set another option for achieving the plan's ends, i.e., the strengthening of structures that do not meet Standard 413, by adding Article 14(a) to TMA 38, which allowed the demolition of the building that requires strengthening and its rebuilding (according to construction rights under applicable plans in place plus the construction rights that can be approved as per TMA 38).
The Plan was supposed to only be applicable to new buildings erected according to the provisions of Section 14(a) of TMA 38 but was inapplicable to existing buildings where a given building was being strengthened (to withstand earthquakes and have security rooms added to each dwelling unit), while adding additional footage, based on the provisions of TMA 38 (the so-called, thickening construction).
The central contention of the petitioners was that the Plan at issue could not have been (legally) approved, for it was not brought for consideration before the local (planning) committee, as mandated by Section 61(a)(c)(3) of the Planning and Construction Act of 1965 (hereinafter, "the Act").  A written opinion by the local committee's engineer provides that public institutions, open areas and infrastructure afford requisite solutions for the needs that arise from the plan. 

As stated, the District Court of Tel Aviv-Jaffa, sitting as an administrative court, presided over by the Hon. Judge Meir Ifrach, accepted the petitioners' position and held that the local committee had no authority to approve the plan before a written opinion was submitted by its engineer, as required by law.
The Hon. Judge Meir Ifrach added, "To my mind, an opinion, as required by Section 61(a)(c)(3), must be based on factual findings gathered by the engineer, which relate to the geographical area where the master plan would be applied [and] which was considered by the local committee."  In addition, it was determined that an oral discussion, within the framework of the local committee's deliberation, does not cure the defect caused by the absence of a written opinion, since such procedure brings about a fundamental and meticulous examination of the matter at issue.
Therefore, the Honorable Court granted the appeal and invalided Plan רג\מק\340\ג\30\א\ of the City of Ramat Gan.

The foregoing decision has great weight in the application of TMA 38/2 in the City of Ramat Gan.  Its import is that  without a planning basis, comporting with applicable statutory provisions, for approval of requested density in petitions for construction permits (those already submitted to the local committee prior to the issuance of the above decision), submitted by entrepreneurs who relied on the Plan, will not be approved.

The consequences of the holding in the case is that all projects planned based on the Plan, which approved greater density, and did not yet receive construction permit, will have to be resubmitted and a new plan will have to be issued in order to bring such projects to fruition.
Right after the decision was handed down it became the object of much criticism.  The central contention was that the honorable court had failed to give sufficient weight in its decision to the extent of harm it will cause the public, due to the cancellation of the Plan and the legitimate reliance on the local committee's decision, which had previously, on 19 May 2013, approved the Plan.
For the full decision click here