High Court of Justice 1898/06 Ministry of Interior v. National Labor Court Jerusalem – Courts Administration - part 4

"The rule is that a decision on a claim of delay requires an examination of three elements: subjective delay, objective delay and the severity of the violation of the rule of law (High Court of Justice 170/87 Asulin v.  Mayor of Kiryat Gat, IsrSC 42(1) 678; and see recently Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 2273/03 Blue Island General Partnership v.  Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel, [published in Nevo] given on December 7, 2006, paragraphs 86-87).  It was held that 'the subjective element focuses on the petitioner's conduct and the question of whether the passage of time shows that he has waived his rights.  The objective element concerns a change in the situation for the worse and harm to the proper interests of the administrative authority or third parties, caused by the delay in filing the petition.  The third element concerns the severity of the violation of the rule of law that emerges from the petition and the public's interest in hearing the petition' (High Court of Justice 1262/06 The Movement for Quality Government in Israel v.  The Shas faction, [published in Nevo], given on March 5, 2006, para.  12).  It was further determined that 'the ratio between the three elements relevant to the delay is determined according to the relative weight of each of the considerations in the circumstances of each matter.  A decision on a claim of delay is therefore based on a balance between the petitioner's interest in cancelling the administrative act; the Respondent's interest in its existence; and the public's interest in the rule of law' (ibid., paragraph 13)...  'The claim of delay is not based mainly on the degree of good faith and the nature of the Petitioners' conduct, but rather on the degree of harm to the Petitioners' interests as opposed to the expected damage to other interests as a result of the delay in filing the petition.  The proper balance between the harms expected of each of the interested parties as a result of the acceptance or rejection of the petition will determine the fate of the claim' (High Court of Justice 7053/96 Amcor inTax Appeal v.  Minister of the Interior, IsrSC 55(1) 193, para.  5)." (High Court of Justice 702/05 Basra v.  National Council for Planning and Building ([published in Nevo], 3 June 2007) para.  4).