After not submitting a letter of defense in the lawsuit against him, it was decided to resume the trial with prosecutor Dana Kashdi. Last year, Netanyahu was ordered to pay half a million shekels.
Yair Netanyahu in the Magistrate's Court, last month
Photo:
Gideon Markovich
The Magistrate's Court in Kfar Saba ruled that Yair Netanyahu will pay Dana NIS 4,500, because he did not file a letter of defense in the lawsuit against him.
It was further decided that the previous judgment would be set aside and that the trial in the matter would be renewed.
In August, Kashdi filed a half-million-shekel defamation lawsuit against the prime minister's son, after he posted pictures on his Twitter account of Kashdi showing her having an intimate relationship with Defense Minister Bnei Gantz.
When enough, she vehemently denied the allusions in the publications, claiming that her reputation was tarnished.
The court owed Netanyahu the full amount of the lawsuit - half a million shekels, after Shadi presented proof that in the Interior Ministry database the address registered under Netanyahu's name is on Balfour Street in Jerusalem, and there is confirmation of delivery of a registered mail to the above address.
Netanyahu filed a motion to set aside the ruling, and as stated, the judge granted his request, but rejected the claim that the ruling should be set aside.
"The applicant is the son of the Israeli prime minister and apparently lives in the prime minister's official residence on Balfour Street in Jerusalem. The applicant chose to register his address with the address of the official residence at the Ministry of the Interior, and the consequences of this choice apply to him," said Ronen Peleg.
"The respondent invented the statement of claim through the Israel Post on behalf of the applicant. The postal item was received by a representative of the Prime Minister's Residence, and that is sufficient to create a lawful invention."
The judge added: "I am of the opinion that the applicant's right to conduct his defense and receive his day in court should be preferred, subject to the imposition of costs, which would express his failure to file a defense on time and the delay caused by him."