Zeev Welner & Co. Law Offices
[Home Page]
[Firm Profile]
[Attorneys]
[Areas of Practice]
[Court Decisions]
[Israel Legal Network]
[Contact Us]
[Publications]
Zeev Welner & Co. Law Offices
   Duns 100
Zeev Welner & Co. Law Offices [Click here for HEBREW version]
Court Decisions
Zeev Welner & Co. Law Offices

(Full text decisions available in Hebrew Only)

  • High court of justice appeal, 1000/92, Hava Bavli V. The rabbinical high court - Jerusalem.
    This decisionhas created a different kind of jurisdiction patterns, from the ones practiced till then by compelling and binding the rabbinical tribunal and its judges to deliberate within the framework of the substantial-civil law, as far as the rights established to any one of the parties litigating, according to the aforesaid law.
  • High court of justice appeal, 5466/94, Zeev Welner V. The chairman of the Israeli labor party.
    A high court decision instructing a raecision of a coalition agreement, (better known as: "the high court of justice by-pass agreement") signed between the then government party (the "labor party) and the "Shas" party.
    This agreement was going to write off the Israeli justice system's significant achievements during the past decade, in the areas of: tolerance, religion, family and particularly all that concerns to women's basic rights and women equality of rights.
    The main threat in the agreement was pointed towards the revolutionary actions, taken by the high court during the "Bavli Case" mentioned above, namely: the instruction, or more likely, the order to the Rabbinical courts to deliberate upon and according to the civil law guide lines in regards to property matters' disputes between spouses. Thus, the parties were about to sign an agreement which will secure a supportive vote, in the Israeli Parliament, for writing off any high court of justice future decision which will affect the "religious status quo".
  • High court of justice appeal 7673/98, Joan does V. The attorney general.
    A case dealing with the victim's legal representation right in the criminal proceedings.
  • Civil appeal 169/94 (interim case 4152/94), Marcel Werner V. Corticiera Amorim L. D. A & Amorim Irmaos L. D. A.
    A Supreme Court ruling setting out the rules and criteria for lifting up the corporate veil in regards to a limited company.
  • Request 15/86, The state of Israel V. Avi Zur.
    The Supreme Court deliberated on a detention till completion of proceedings against the deputy minister of Agriculture, all in relation to "lands issues", and has formed a liberal turn in its approach up until then.
  • Civil appeal 692, 693/86, Jacob Botkovski & Co. V. Eliyahu Gat & Others.
    A Supreme Court decision which established a precedent in the field of real-estate in regards to the innecessity of a signature in a real-estate deals, and the application of clause 12 (Bona Fiddes) in the contract law relating to matters of which maintaining negotiation towards a deal is done Mala Fiddes.
  • Civil appeal 2558/91, Joan Doe V. John Dow.
    A Supreme Court precedent in the field of paternity tests, setting out the binding principles for the test.
  • Civil request 1648/92, Pnina Turne V. Daniel Charles Meshulam.
    The first decision given by the courts, after Israel had joined the Hague Treaty (returning of kidnapped children), and applied this treaty on visiting right.
  • Civil appeal, 6557/95, Haim Avnery V. Tamar Avnery.
    A Supreme Court decision, relating to the applicability of the privty practice in regards to a monthly paid pension. The decision further discusses the following question: since when does the setting of accounts start, all in light of the fact that some of the money had already been used for the family's needs.
  • Civil appeal 4523/00, Moshe Kahan V. Linor Kahan.
    A Supreme Court decision relating to the components of child support.
  • Civil appeal 6408/93, Esther Buzaglo V. David Buzaglo.
    A Supreme Court decision dealing with the possibility to use the remedy of equitable receivership in suits between spouses.
  • Civil appeal 1327/90, Miri Shibat V. Hanoch Shibat.
    A Supreme Court decision, dealing with the jurisdiction of the civil court to discuss claims regarding property & assets, after the rabbinical court had deliberated in the matter and had already given its verdict in the divorce suit, in which was the property & assets suit wrapped.
  • Criminal appeal 3829/90, Ronit Arieli V. Efraim Arieli.
    A Supreme Court decision dealing with the Ultra-Vires of the district court sitting and deliberating in a contempt of court request relating to the child seeing arrangement set.
  • Civil appeal 51/86, Meir Ben-Dayan V. Geinosar Cohen Building Society.
    A Supreme Court decision granting a vast interpretation to an arbitration clause in a combination agreement.
  • Civil appeal permission, 359/85, Teresa (Korplash) Koch V. Baruch Koch.
    A Supreme Court decision dealing with the district court Ultra-Vires to deliberate in a suit to write off a marital agreement in regards to property & assets, although approved by the rabbinical court of law. This decision has been a cornerstone in a chain of decisions in this matter, amongst them Sima Levi V. The rabbinical court.
  • High court of justice appeal, 219/81, Meir Shitrit V. The minister of Agriculture.
    An administrative law case dealing with the lands division and distribution in between the members of Moshav Yavniel.
  • Civil case 11/79, Efraim Polak V. Bizou De- Atwal.
    Shlomo Levin, Judge., serving as a Tel-Aviv district court judge deals with the claim of: "inappropriate forum", and sets out the rules upon which a claim of such can be applied in Israel.
  • Civil appeal 810/77, Nuri Darwish V. Malka Lusthause.
    A Supreme Court verdict dealing in the appropriate way of debt payment from the estate.
  • Civil appeal 800/75, Moshe Kot V. The resident organization.
    A Supreme Court verdict dealing for the first time in clause 12 of the contract law "Bona Fiddes towards signing a contract" and limiting the remedies applicable by and from it.
  • High court of justice appeal, 590/75, Gaavriel Barsimantov V. The ministry of religious affairs.
    An administrative law case dealing with the subject of appointment to public office.
Zeev Welner & Co. Law Offices

Zeev Welner & Co. Law offices - All Rights Reserved

Member of PsakDin.co.il Israeli Legal Network Constructed by Salta Internet Ltd. Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!