within the realm of reasonableness and whether all the checks and clarifications were made and the relevant considerations were considered for the purpose of making the decision, and whether it was properly reasoned.
- In conclusion, even if my opinion is heard, I would propose to apply the rules of administrative audit also in the framework of examining the fulfillment of the immunity conditions of a public authority employee, as aforesaid In Section 7C To the Ordinance The Torts.
At the very least, and insofar as my opinion is not heard, I agree with the position of my colleague Justice Animals in paragraph 37 of her judgment, that although the applicant is a public authority or a public servant, the burden is on The Plaintiff To show why the conditions of immunity should not be recognized.
| Judge |
Judge H. Meltzer:
- I concur with the preliminary and exhaustive judgment of my colleague, the judge A. Hayut, including with regard to its position regarding the proper way to examine the fulfillment of the conditions of the alleged immunity of a public authority employee. My friend, the judge Y. Amit, in fact, expresses in his dissenting approach on this last point what is required, in his opinion, by the law, or by the desired law (and even on the issue of the desired law, there is, in my view, a face here and there); At the same time, my colleague's perception does not, in my understanding, give full validity to the provisions of the Amendment Law The Torts Ordinance (No. 10), 5765-2005 (hereinafter - The Law). In these we can find a difference between the reference that the court must grant to a notice of recognition of immunity, which is given on behalf of the state in a claim filed against a civil servant (Section 7B of the law) and the judicial treatment that is supposed to be conducted in a request for immunity in a claim filed against an employee of the public authority (Section 7C to the law). At the same time, in a lawsuit against a civil servant, the court is asked to Visit The Notice The State regarding the existence of immunity with respect to the employee's act according to Section 7A Law (Action, including omission - see: Section 7 to the law), so in an action against an employee of the public authority - the court is required to Examine The Request the public authority, or the employee therein, and determine whether the conditions of immunity are met with respect to the employee's act according to the Section 7A to the law.
- I am of the opinion that In common law The aforementioned wording in the provisions of the existing law has a number of meanings (and therefore I do not accept the view expressed in the name of the counselCriminal Case - Extension of Trial Date on the subject);
These will be detailed below: