Real Estate
In the country
Chinese companies take over infrastructure?
The Supreme Court ruled no
The Supreme Court dismissed the Contractors Association's petition against the Centralization Committee.
The association claimed that the Chinese corporations were taking over the big projects.
The court: "It has not been proven that there was a defect in professional judgment"
Tags
Building
David Rosenthal
Tuesday, 30 November 2021, 23:26 Updated: 23:33
Share on Facebook
Share on WhatsApp
Share on general
Share on general
Share on Twitter
Share on Email
0 comments
The Supreme Court this evening (Tuesday) rejected the petition of the Israel Contractors Association against the decision of the Centralization Committee.
The latter rejected the association's request to include a group of Chinese corporations, competing mainly in the field of national construction and transportation infrastructure, in the list of centralized factors and in the list of significant non-financial corporations, which are complex under the Centralization Law.
The Chinese corporations were represented by Adv. Ilan Bombach.
More on Walla!
MR.
Something lounge - Japanese in a suit in Old Jaffa
Zap rest system
To the full article
"Does not justify intervening in the decision not to include the corporations under the China Asset Management Commission in the list of centralizing bodies" (Photo: Reuven Castro)
Adv. Ilan Bombach (Photo: Reuven Kapuchinsky)
The petitioners' claim was that the state did not prevent the Chinese corporations from taking over huge projects, thereby harming Israeli companies.
The ruling is innovative in the sense that it clarifies the scope and purpose of the Centralization Law, and on this basis rejects the association's claim that the law allows the recognition that the Chinese government controls those corporations to be recognized. The judgment also states that there was no defect in the decision of the Centralization Committee to reject the request of the Contractors Association to include specific Chinese corporations in lists under the Centralization Law. This is a ruling that has significant political and economic implications.
Justices Neil Handel, David Mintz and Alex Stein ruled in the case: Reasonable and relevant enough in a way that does not justify court intervention. "
Advocate Bombach responded: “I welcome the ruling that accepted our claims and dismissed the petition.
"Inclusion in these lists could have placed significant restrictions on the ability of these corporations, among other things, to participate in tenders for projects worth billions of shekels."
Share on Facebook
Share on WhatsApp
Share on general
Share on general
Share on Twitter
Share on Email
0 comments
