His professionalism. For all this, Flexer demanded compensation in the amount of ILS 3.7 million from the state and the police.
- The Deputy State Attorney for Civil Affairs submitted a brief notice to the Tel Aviv District Court regarding the recognition of the immunity of police officers as public servants (hereinafter: Notice of Recognition). In her statement, the Deputy State Attorney noted that the Attorney General delegated to her his authority to recognize the immunity of public servants and that she confirms that the actions of the police officers were carried out in the performance of their governmental duties as aforesaid In section 7a(b) to the Ordinance and that the exception to the granting of immunity does not exist. In light of this notice, the state asked the District Court to order the dismissal of the lawsuit against the policemen. Flexer objected to this and the application he filed according to Section 7b(c) He petitioned the Ordinance for the court to determine, contrary to the state's position, that in this case the exception to the rule regarding the immunity of public servants in torts for acts they committed in the course of their duties exists, because according to him, the police acted knowingly and with the intention of causing him damage or at least with the possibility of causing him (hereinafter: The exception to immunity).
The District Court (the Honorable Registrar (as he was then called) A. Zamir) accepted the State's position and in its partial judgment of December 9, 2007, dismissed out of hand the claim insofar as it was directed against the police officers, ruling that the State's notice regarding the recognition of their immunity was based on the fact that the competent authorities examined and found that the conditions of immunity were met, and that Flexer did not meet the burden imposed on him in these circumstances to show that there was a defect in the State's judgment that led it to an unreasonable decision regarding the recognition of the immunity of the police officers. The District Court also noted that if it turns out that the police did indeed cause compensable damage to Flexer, the state will be held liable for damages and will be obligated to compensate him. Therefore, and also from a practical aspect, the court added, Flexer will not suffer any damage due to the rejection of the lawsuit he filed against the policemen.