The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Final: The owners of the ballroom will share the burden with the tenants - Walla! Business

2020-12-28T15:29:11.067Z


The Supreme Court denied the request of the landlords to reconsider the settlement formula set by the district court. Landlords and tenants will share the burden of payments from closure periods: "Significant decision for business owners"


  • Business

  • news

Final: The owners of the ballroom will share the burden with the tenants

The Supreme Court denied the request of the landlords to reconsider the settlement formula set by the district court.

Landlords and tenants will share the burden of payments from closure periods: "Significant decision for business owners"

Tags

  • Ballrooms

David Rosenthal

Monday, 28 December 2020, 16:33

  • Share on Facebook

  • Share on WhatsApp

  • Share on general

  • Share on general

  • Share on Twitter

  • Share on Email

0 comments

  • Oz Cohen Yosef Friedman - The Association for Lone Soldiers

  • A rainbow of flavors for Novi Good

  • Netanyahu: Blue and white violated agreements on ...

  • Ariel University of Medicine

  • The Director General of the Ministry of Health, Prof. Hezi Levy, comments on the response ...

  • Netanyahu: Israel will be the first country to emerge from an epidemic ...

  • Israel enters third closure: police check drivers ...

  • Loads in the malls participating in the pilot: "We missed ...

  • Johnson: In light of the rise in morbidity and evidence for a new strain not ...

In the video: Business owners fear closure of stores following crossing the morbidity threshold (Photo: Sonia Gorodisky)

At the end of October, after hearings in a banquet hall owners' lawsuit against the tenants for non-payment, Tel Aviv District Court Judge Yonah Etadegi reached a compromise formula.

He precedent-settingly ruled that landlords and tenants would share the burden due to the corona period.

The plaintiffs sought to appeal to the Supreme Court, and today (Monday) their request for appeal was denied by Judge Meni Mazuz.

More on Walla!

NEWS

The corona left no room for error: this is how the future world of health is built

To the full article

The hall remains orphaned, the parties will share the burden

The story began in August, when the tenants of the hall sought a temporary restraining order for evictions.

According to them, they did not have to pay the full rent to the landlords due to the cessation of activity.

The eviction was postponed several times, pending Judge Etadegi's decision.

In his decision the judge then ruled that the parties would distribute the rent equally until a final decision was given on the matter.

We have since entered a second closure, and the judge has issued another verdict.



"On the one hand," the judge argued, "the 'logic' behind my (temporary) determination to pay half the rent for the months the hall was shut down due to" corona regulations "also applies to the period when the shutdown resumed under those regulations ... on the other hand," This solution set forth in the above decision is temporary in nature and cannot act as a permanent permanent solution.

What was reasonable at the beginning of the event, as a temporary solution, is not necessarily so in the continuation of the event, and it seems that as long as it lasts the cape tends towards the respondent and in favor of her right to make a proper profit from property. "



Judge Etadegi ruled that from 18.9 Tenants 60 percent to landlords, and each additional month will add 10 percent (66 percent on November, 72.6 percent on December and so on up to 100 percent).

A decision with tremendous implications.

Adv. Ilan Bombach (Photo: Reuven Kapuchinsky)

Judge Mazuz rejected, as stated, the request for appeal.

"I have found that the decision of the District Court does not raise any legal question of principle which goes beyond the interests of the parties, and that granting leave to appeal is not necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice."



Attorney Ilan Bombach, the defendants' lawyer, commented: "This is a decision that has enormous implications for banquet halls and businesses in general. The district court ruled that it is not possible to accept a situation where, despite the corona, the contract is maintained as if nothing happened, Corona, therefore, divides the risk between the landlord and the tenant who is forced to close his business. The Supreme Court has decided not to intervene. "

  • Share on Facebook

  • Share on WhatsApp

  • Share on general

  • Share on general

  • Share on Twitter

  • Share on Email

0 comments

Source: walla

All business articles on 2020-12-28

You may like

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.