Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

On 24 March 2009 the District Court of Tel Aviv adopted a narrow interpretation to Regulation 482 in order to prevent potential plaintiffs from taking advantage of the willingness of foreign companies to resolve disputes between the parties in order to subject them to the jurisdiction of the Israeli Court system.

Civil hearing - service of suit to Third Party outside the jurisdiction no longer involves service to an Israeli defendant.

 In this case the Supreme Court ruled that the time has come to change the procedures which were also set down by the Supreme Court, in request for leave for civil appeal 3765/90 Alba Metal Processing Machines Ltd. v. Colgar SPA, where it was found that in service of suit outside the jurisdiction according to Regulation 500(10) of the Civil Procedures Regulations - 1984, does not enable service of a third party policy in which the foreign "defendant", is the sole "defendant".

The Court ruled that it is possible and even proper to prefer another interpretation, according to which a foreign "defendant" in a Third Party Notice can be considered as a necessary or correct litigant for the purpose of the claim which is being conducted in Israel, even if in the said third party notice, there is no "defendant" in addition to the foreign "defendant" to whom to serve the suit in Israel was served properly. In other words, the same test can be applied to a foreign third party as was applied on a foreign defendant, with the necessary changes, and to say that the foreign third party is the necessary or correct party in the claim if, had he been resident in Israel, the Court would have been authorised to hear the third party notice filed against him.