Success and Precedents

Success and Precedents
Our firm has represented clients in legal cases involving vital issues of fundamental importance.  In some of them, decisions of precedential value were made by different courts, including:
o  ה"פ (Tel Aviv District Court)  20316-12-12Duenas v. DCD Maximum, Ltd. - Cancellation of a clause in a contract that granted an option to purchase a leased asset; the court determined that the clause was included in the agreement without the knowledge of the promisee (non est factum).
o HCJ (High Court of Justice) 360/96 Krasik , v Minister of Finance, et al -  A case where a precedent was set in a decision holding that expropriation of land by the state may be terminated and property returned to the previous owner.
o ABPCr (Appeal by Permission-Criminal) State of Israel v. Omnipol, et al - A precedent as to the use of multi-purpose designation of structures constructed before 1940.
o ABPCiv (Appeal by Permission-Civil) 5814/90 Zilberstein v. Holding & Trust Co. - A precedent set regarding evacuation of protected tenants of business premises.
o ABPCiv 7452/96 Aharon Bros. Contractors Co. v. Ministry of Defense - A precedent set regarding increased compensation in a dispute concerning a lease agreement.
o CivApp (Civil Appeal) Ida Lipkin v. Dor Ha'Zahav - a precedent regarding the right of restitution involving a land sale contract.
o CivApp 625/73 Joe Yosef Koronel  v. Nehama Koronel – Transnational case regarding transfer of custody from the mother to the father, who resides abroad.
 
o Handling Reduction of Property Taxes and Municipal Levies – Over the years, our firm has accumulated extensive experience in handling in its interaction with relevant authorities, local authorities in particular, the reduction of property taxes and various municipal levies for individuals and businesses. This experience, combined with specific expertise in the field of leasing, accords our office a well-formed platform for coping with local authorities' requirements and demands for collecting various and sundry municipal levies and charges. It is this kind of capability and experience that, among others, enable us to fittingly assist foreign residents and overseas entrepreneurs.
o Handling Demands for Development and Improvement Levies – Our firm specializes in interfacing with local committees and authorities regarding demands of development and improvement levies, placed on both individuals and corporate entities, as part of a package of activities related to handling real estate matters.  Our firm is vigilant to constantly be at the forefront in this dynamic area of the law and is careful to remain continually updated and be current as to analysis, study and comprehending the latest legal thinking, emanating from the courts, particularly as to the subject of municipal levies and requirements, which we combine with diligent study of new holdings made by different courts and other adjudicative bodies and how they may be implemented within the framework of our clients' representation and the handling of their affairs.
o Handling Demands of outside Authorities and Corporations - Our office handles the ongoing billing by outside authorities and municipal corporations (such as water, sewage, and power  charges; and the requirements and constraints administered by the state's Ministries of Environment, Infrastructure and Public Health).  We handle elimination and offset of charges, requirements and dissolution of sanctions by the authorities, which are, at times, wrongly assessed and even contrary to law.  If necessary, we transfer handling such matters to the adjudicative plateau, to insure compliance by such authorities with our clients' legal and equitable rights.
o Dealing with Authorities Externally – Handling authorities' claims and various demands, such as the provision of a holder's identity in order to facilitate municipal billing, instances of refusal to grant licenses, requirements of the conservation departments, tenants' complaints and the handling municipal directives.  If and when necessary, our firm, who specializes in representing clients in administrative adjudicative instances, may provide legal services and representation with regard to filing administrative and judicial appeals, administrative petitions and petitions with the High Court of Justice.
o Legal Representation in Various Adjudicative Tribunals Handling Demands for Property Taxes and Municipal Levies – Handling authorities' claims and various demands, such as the holder's identity in order to facilitate municipal billing, refusal to grant licenses, requirements of the conservation departments, tenants' complaints and the handling municipal directives. If and when necessary, our firm, who specializes in representing clients in administrative adjudicative instances may provide legal services and representation with regard to filing administrative and judicial appeals, administrative petitions and petitions with the High Court of Justice.  As part of such representation we handle the preparation of applications for temporary injunctions and other temporary remedies; our office is well-reputed as to achieving innovative precedents.
Our firm is associated with CPA firms, engineers, appraisers and leading tax advisors. 
o Working Relationships with Various Professionals – Our office is in constant contact with CPA firms, engineers, appraisers and some of Israel's leading tax advisers in the country, who are accessible to us when needed in handling clients' legal affairs, particularly concerning matters related to  municipal levies and various requirements made by different authorities.
 
Contracts
o Handling Reduction of Property Taxes and Municipal Levies – Over the years, our firm has accumulated extensive experience in handling in its interaction with relevant authorities, local authorities in particular, the reduction of property taxes and various municipal levies for individuals and businesses. This experience, combined with specific expertise in the field of leasing, accords our office a well-formed platform for coping with local authorities' requirements and demands for collecting various and sundry municipal levies and charges. It is this kind of capability and experience that, among others, enable us to fittingly assist foreign residents and overseas entrepreneurs.
o Handling Demands for Development and Improvement Levies – Our firm specializes in interfacing with local committees and authorities regarding demands of development and improvement levies, placed on both individuals and corporate entities, as part of a package of activities related to handling real estate matters.  Our firm is vigilant to constantly be at the forefront in this dynamic area of the law and is careful to remain continually updated and be current as to analysis, study and comprehending the latest legal thinking, emanating from the courts, particularly as to the subject of municipal levies and requirements, which we combine with diligent study of new holdings made by different courts and other adjudicative bodies and how they may be implemented within the framework of our clients' representation and the handling of their affairs.
o Handling Demands of outside Authorities and Corporations - Our office handles the ongoing billing by outside authorities and municipal corporations (such as water, sewage, and power  charges; and the requirements and constraints administered by the state's Ministries of Environment, Infrastructure and Public Health).  We handle elimination and offset of charges, requirements and dissolution of sanctions by the authorities, which are, at times, wrongly assessed and even contrary to law.  If necessary, we transfer handling such matters to the adjudicative plateau, to insure compliance by such authorities with our clients' legal and equitable rights.
o Dealing with Authorities Externally – Handling authorities' claims and various demands, such as the provision of a holder's identity in order to facilitate municipal billing, instances of refusal to grant licenses, requirements of the conservation departments, tenants' complaints and the handling municipal directives.  If and when necessary, our firm, who specializes in representing clients in administrative adjudicative instances, may provide legal services and representation with regard to filing administrative and judicial appeals, administrative petitions and petitions with the High Court of Justice.
o Legal Representation in Various Adjudicative Tribunals Handling Demands for Property Taxes and Municipal Levies – Handling authorities' claims and various demands, such as the holder's identity in order to facilitate municipal billing, refusal to grant licenses, requirements of the conservation departments, tenants' complaints and the handling municipal directives. If and when necessary, our firm, who specializes in representing clients in administrative adjudicative instances may provide legal services and representation with regard to filing administrative and judicial appeals, administrative petitions and petitions with the High Court of Justice.  As part of such representation we handle the preparation of applications for temporary injunctions and other temporary remedies; our office is well-reputed as to achieving innovative precedents.
Our firm is associated with CPA firms, engineers, appraisers and leading tax advisors. 
o Working Relationships with Various Professionals – Our office is in constant contact with CPA firms, engineers, appraisers and some of Israel's leading tax advisers in the country, who are accessible to us when needed in handling clients' legal affairs, particularly concerning matters related to  municipal levies and various requirements made by different authorities.
 
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.
o  Accompaniment of International Transactions – Accompaniment of different projects and real estate investment ventures overseas, and formation of engagement agreements with different entities around the world.  Our office maintains transnational working relationships (correspondence) with law firms in the U.S., U.K., Italy, Spain and Turkey.  These allow us to address in real-time the extensive international activities of our clients abroad.
Summary of Admin. Pet 20386-09-13 Adam Teva VaDin vs. Tel Aviv Planning & Construction District Appeals Committee
On 9 December 2013 the court granted Adam Teva VaDin's petition and canceled a plan (רג\מק\340\ג\30\א\1), allowing greater density [than allowed by law] in TMA 38 demolition and construction projects, the so-called small Pinui Binui, in the city of Ramat Gan .  Continue Reading ...

Summary of Admin. Pet 20386-09-13 Adam Teva VaDin vs. Tel Aviv Planning & Construction District Appeals Committee (full version)
First Page:  On 9 December 2013 the court granted Adam Teva VaDin's petition and canceled a plan (רג\מק\340\ג\30\א\1), allowing greater density [than allowed by law] in TMA 38 demolition and construction projects, the so-called small Pinui Binui, in the city of Ramat Gan.
Details – Second Page: Plan רג\מק\340\ג\30\א\1 (hereinafter, "the Plan") followed its predecessor (Planרג/מק/340/ג/30/ ), which was in effect for 18 months and expired on 31 December 2012.  The purpose of both plans was to afford additional housing units on lots where activity in line with TMA 38 together with Planרג/מק/340/ג/30/ (as amended) is carried out, by determining that average apartment area will be not less than 60 square meters (including a warehouse and a security room) and subject to the guidelines set forth in the plan.
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.