The New Class Actions Law
In two recent judgement handed down by the District Court of Tel Aviv the court discussed the implication of placing criminal liability on directors and officers and reached contradicting conclusions.
See full article.
Recently 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.
Recently two Court rulings were handed down, in which the courts referred to several aspects of a derivative claim: Only in rare circumstances will a derivative claim be dismissed in limine; a Derivative Claim Cannot be Filed by a Former Shareholder.
On 24 April 2009 the Haifa District Court handed down its decision in an insurance claim filed by Sky Club Ltd - C.F.270-00. In its decision, the District Court ruled that an insurer which failed to pay insurance benefits on time may be obliged to compensate the insured for the damage it suffered as a result of the delay.
Visit our new press section to learn about the firm's acclaims by the world's leading legal directories - Press here
In two Court rulings handed down recently, the Court imposed personal liability on the D&Os towards employees of the company.
it is hard to believe how many cases involve this question or some variation of it, but nevertheless until to date there is no clear-cut precedent.
Most policies which cover diamonds during exhibitions, include a special condition according to which: “Stock should be displayed in key-locked showcases at all times during exhibition hours other than whilst removed for showing to customers”.
In a recent judgment (C.A 004916/96 Jotaly v. Naptonia and Others, Magistrates Court of Haifa - not yet published), the Israeli court once again ruled that the Unattended Vehicle Exclusion applies to a loss of insured property from a vehicle which was left unattended for a few moments.
The court accepted insurers’ position that the exclusion applies also in cases where it was not the insured who left the vehicle, but a carrier who carried the goods to the insured’s premises.
Most J.B policies contain an arbitration clause only in respect of a dispute regarding quantum, but the clause does not refer the parties to arbitration in case of other disputes regarding coverage or liability.
By Adv. Peggy Sharon and Adv. Sharon Shefer
It often happens that two or more insurance policies apply to the same interest in diamonds which are conveyed from one diamonteer to another. When these diamonds are lost in a hold-up or due to other insured events, an issue of double insurance may arise.
The limitation period for filing an insurance claim against an insurer is a critical issue for both insurers and insureds.
In recent years, due to the political situation in Israel, Israeli diamond dealers have been travelling abroad more often in order to meet with their clients.
As a result, there has been a direct increase in the number of losses and thefts involving Israeli diamonteers outside the country and new problems are being faced by both Israeli and non-Israeli insurers which provide coverage to these diamonteers.
Insurers are often faced with cases in which part of the fault for the loss or damage lies with the assured or someone on its behalf, nevertheless, they are obliged to pay insurance benefits regardless of the assured's acts.
In these cases, during the past few years, the Israeli courts have begun to adopt the contributory fault doctrine also in insurance cases.
Home
