On December 18, 2023, the District Court deleted the Applicants' appeal against the Registrar's decision, claiming that the appeal was filed incorrectly (Appealing a Registrar's Decision 26125-11-23). Whereas, the District Court defined the registration decision as "Judgment", the District Court ruled that the correct procedural course to challenge the decision is to file an application for leave to appeal to this court, in accordance with To the section 96(A) Law The Courts.
On June 9, 2024, this Court dismissed a petition filed against the above judgment (High Court of Justice 4181/24). In my judgment on the same matter, which was given with the consent of my colleagues, I noted that the District Court erred in its determination: I clarified that the Registrar's decision constitutes "Another Decision", and not "Judgment", and accordingly, Because There was room to hear the appeal on its merits, according to Section 96(II) Law The Courts. I further clarified that the way to petition for the correction of the error of the District Court is by filing an application for leave to appeal the judgment of the District Court to this Court.
Accordingly, on February 18, 2025, the Applicants filed an application for leave to appeal to this Court (Civil Appeal Authority 46005-02-25). The request for leave to appeal was granted, with the consent of the parties, while it was determined that the District Court must hold a hearing on its merits in the appeal filed by the Applicants against the Registrar's decision. In other words: the judgment of the District Court on the matter Lack of authority - on which the Applicants relied in their application before me - it was reversed by this Court, in the matter of Civil Appeal Authority 46005-02-25.
Indeed, in its judgment of June 11, 2025, the District Court heard the Applicants' appeal against the registration decision on its merits, in accordance with the To the section 96(II) Law The Courts, and dismissed the appeal. This judgment was given with authority.