Civil Case (Jerusalem) 74304-12-20 Moshe Hotuel v. Housing and Development for Israel Ltd.

Judgment

1. We are dealing with a claim dated December 31, 2020, which concerns compensation for damages caused due to construction defects. The plaintiffs are petitioning for damages in the amount of NIS 304,272 plus interest and linkage, VAT, legal expenses and legal fees.
2. As appears from the statement of claim, in 1982 the plaintiffs purchased an  apartment (hereinafter: "the apartment") from defendant 3, after it purchased the apartment from defendant 1, who built it.  Over the years, defendant 1 merged with defendant 2 and was liquidated.  Later in 2014, the plaintiffs asked to renovate their apartment and found out that there were serious and dangerous construction defects in the building.
3. Initially, the statement of claim was filed against defendants 1 and 2 only, but later the plaintiffs requested to add defendant 3 to the statement of claim and filed an amended statement of claim. Therefore, defendants 1 and 2 filed an amended statement of defense.  During the course of the proceeding, an attempt was made to contact defendant 3, without success, and therefore there is no reference on her behalf in this case, and the plaintiffs requested a judgment against her in the absence of a defense.

The parties and the background to filing the lawsuit:

4. The plaintiffs, Mr. and Mrs. Moshe and Juliet Hatuel, are the owners of the rights to a residential apartment on the ground floor at 203 Hatzbar Street in the Gilo neighborhood of Jerusalem, which is registered as sub-plot 57 in Block 28050, Plot 30.
5. Defendant 1, Israel Housing and Development Company Ltd., is a company that was engaged in providing services for the Ministry of Housing during the relevant period and was liquidated after a merger with defendant 2.
6. Defendant 2, Azorim Building Company (1965) Ltd., is a contracting company that merged with defendant 1, and as a result of the merger defendant 1 was liquidated.
7. Defendant 3, Relfo Israel Ltd., is the company from which the plaintiffs purchased the apartment that is the subject of this action.
8. On August 2, 1982, an agreement was entered into between the plaintiffs and defendant 3 according to which the apartment would be sold to the couple completely new and without known defects. In 2014, the couple decided to renovate the apartment, and during the renovation work, a serious engineering failure was discovered in the construction of the building, which led to the eviction of the plaintiffs from their apartment and entailed costs, both direct and indirect,  imposed on the plaintiffs, for the purpose of repairing it.

The parties' arguments