The two parties did not appeal the partial judgment, and it even appears that it correctly defined the division of powers between the Labor Court and the Administrative Affairs Court.
- Following the partial judgment, the petition was filed, in which the petitioner petitioned for monetary relief, which concerned the following grounds: wages; compensation for lack of a hearing; compensation for employment in violation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Law, 5748-1988; compensation for workplace bullying; convalescence pay for 2022; Payment of annual vacation pay.
It appears that the Petitioner was perceived as a mistake in understanding the partial judgment of the Labor Court and with regard to the scope of the jurisdiction of the Court for Administrative Affairs and the remedies requested in the framework of the petition under discussion.
- First of all, it is worth mentioning basic concepts, according to which, as is well known, except for monetary relief due to one of the grounds listed in the Third Addendum of the Administrative Courts Law, which deals with issues in respect of which an administrative action can be filed (according to Section 5(3) In this law), the Court for Administrative Affairs is not authorized to hear a claim in which the relief sought is monetary relief. In any event, it is not even possible to petition for financial relief in the framework of an administrative petition concerning one of the issues listed in the first appendix of the law (Civil Appeal Authority 6590/05 Ashdod Municipality v. Sarfati [Published in Nevo] (September 18, 2005), the Honorable Justice A. Grunis, paragraphs 3-4; Civil Appeal Authority 3993/05 S.A.B. Investment and Development Company inTax Appeal v. Beer Sheva Municipality [Published in Nevo] (May 25, 2006), the Honorable Justice A. Rubinstein, paragraph 16; Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 9168/05 Tavakoli v. Director of the Licensing and Supervision Division of the Tel Aviv-Jaffa Municipality [Published in Nevo] (May 22, 2008), the Honorable Justice A. Vogelman, para. 11; Administrative Appeal Leave Request 7363/09 Mishan Center in Tax Appeal v. Tel Aviv-Yafo Municipality [Published in Nevo] (March 2, 2010), the Honorable Justice A. Vogelman, para. 9; Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 3832/07 Afula Municipality v. National Insurance Institute [Published in Nevo] (December 21, 2010), the Honorable Judge A. Arbel, paragraph 27; Request for Leave to Appeal 8689/16 Ramat Hasharon Municipality v. The Green Village [Published in Nevo] (September 26, 2017), the Honorable Justice A. Vogelman, paragraph 11 (and more broadly, paragraphs 12-25); High Court of Justice 6442/11 Borowski v. Holon Municipality [Published in Nevo] (September 18, 2011), the Honorable Justice A. Vogelman, para. 5).
- To this, it should be added that as stated in the partial judgment of the Labor Court, and as has already been determined, in circumstances in which a petitioner seeks to claim monetary relief due to one of the reasons listed In the section 129(a) in the Prisons Ordinance (similar to monetary relief by virtue of the listed cause of action In the section 93A in the Police Ordinance), he must conduct the legal process in two stages. The Step One, which gives rise to the claim for monetary relief, the petitioner must bring before the Court for Administrative Affairs, which has the exclusive authority to hear those grounds that have been excluded from the jurisdiction of the Labor Court. In the second stage, if his administrative petition is accepted, the petitioner can file a claim with the Labor Court in order to receive the financial remedies (Civil Appeal Authority 6607/19 State of Israel - Israel Police v. Yakubov [Published in Nevo] (February 12, 2020), The Honorable Justice v. Hendel, paragraph 9 (hereinafter - The Yakubov Matter); Labor Appeal (National) 4522-11-18 Zelig - State of Israel, Israel Police [Published in Nevo] (March 29, 2020), the Honorable Judge H. Ofek-Gendler (hereinafter - The Zelig Matter); Labor Appeal (National) 81582-01-19 Ben Sha'anan - State of Israel, Israel Prison Service [Published in Nevo] (March 29, 2020), The Honorable Judge H. Ofek-Gendler, paragraphs 15-20 (hereinafter - The Ben Sha'anan Matter)).
- The aforesaid conclusion, according to which the Petitioner must conduct its claim in two stages, was also the conclusion of the Labor Court in its partial judgment. In all those matters in respect of which the Tribunal ruled that the Petitioner must file Beginning Administrative petition, it was emphasized that these are matters in respect of which it was stated that "At this stage" are not within the scope of his authority. However, it was stated that there may be a future claim for monetary relief in their case, which will be clarified only after the same grounds are clarified before the Court for Administrative Affairs.
The Labor Court was also aware of the need to split the clarification of the grounds in respect of which the petition was filed, and for this reason it was stated that two grounds are under its jurisdiction (wages and clothing fees). With regard to the other grounds, it was stated that they "do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, at least some of them at this stage, and in respect of them the motion for summary dismissal is granted. In these circumstances, the plaintiff will notify within 15 days whether she wishes to file her claim as soon as possible or only after the completion of the parallel proceeding..." (emphasis added) (partial judgment, para. 16).