Caselaw

Serious Crimes Case (Haifa) 9375-05-21 State of Israel v. David Abu Aziz - part 79

March 24, 2026
Print

The property that was purchased, as stated above, actually belongs to his ex-wife Sigal and he helps rent it out for her and his children.  To the court's question, after the business was closed, it was rented, and so it is to this day.  The area he eventually received was 795 square meters, and no appeal was registered, because "there is a problem with this property." He was in contact with a very senior figure in the ILA and for a decade tried to register the property at the Land Registry Office.

The defendant testified that a lawsuit was filed against him for invasion by the deceased.

On January 15, 2019, he received the claim "Derech Moshe from the lottery".  He received a lawsuit for illegal incursions and construction, as well as the local planning and building committee "Carmel Slopes", as an additional defendant.  The claim was clarified in the Haifa Magistrate's Court and he attended three hearings.  In one of the hearings, the judge told him, "You have to settle the matter of registration.  Therefore, from that time on, I dealt only with the issue of registration that the judge told me, and from that time on I no longer dealt with anything in the Magistrate's Court." In 2019, he himself filed a lawsuit in the Haifa District Court against the heirs and the deceased, for the purpose of handling the registration.  According to him, "There was a problem with the registration that I was sued as an invader of land that I bought, I have a contract for everything in full consideration, every contract with full consideration, she told me I have to settle it because I am not registered in the Land Registry." In other words, the properties are not registered in his name at the Land Registry Office, and the registration was not arranged because debts exist.  According to his version, "In the lawsuit I filed, Moshe Einhorn and Dalia Mandel approached me, the defendants asked me to go to Torah law, they asked me to go to Torah law, they didn't want to go to court, to transfer the claim to a Torah court, and I transferred the lawsuit only against them to a Torah court.  The Torah court asked me to ask the district court to bring a cancellation, to delete the lawsuit, and only then to come to the hearings in the Torah court." This was, the defendant said, at the initiative of the heirs, he did not even know about the existence of the alternative institution in question.  According to the defendant, it was Moshe Einhorn who initiated a hearing in a court of justice.  "He told them he would bring it, he told them stories that he couldn't get coronavirus, he asked for adjournments from the court, and each time I received a change to the date of the hearing.  When the time came, I arrived, they didn't come to the hearing, I was alone, there was no discussion.  If he had intended not to come in advance, he would have said no to come, but suddenly he disappeared and didn't come." To the court's question, "What did he tell you?" the defendant said, "The fact is that I came to the hearing because I know that you will also come to the hearing." He did not conduct an inquiry because he could not know what was said to the court, "I received it by hand at the hearing." Afterwards, the defendant did nothing, "The story is over, the lawsuit I filed in the district court was deleted, there was a short hearing and it was deleted in two lines, Dan Zohar was my lawyer and he is writing a statement to the court." The judge ordered that if the lawsuit is renewed, he must "pay a fine for filing the lawsuit." As he clarified, "They got out of both lawsuits."

Previous part1...7879
80...140Next part