Civil Case (St.) 21733-08-16 Maccabi Tel Aviv Basketball Club (1995) Ltd. v. Yuval Naimi

Background and Summary of the Parties' Arguments

1. The plaintiff was injured on August 26, 2013, while playing as a basketball player for the "Israel national team", while training for the team. Prior to the incident, the plaintiff was a professional basketball player and was fully functioning.  At the relevant times of the injury, the plaintiff was a registered player and a full-fledged player in the Maccabi Tel Aviv Basketball Club (hereinafter: The Club).

The club's players were insured, at the relevant times of the plaintiff's injury, by defendant 1 (hereinafter: the insurer).  Following the accident and until he recovered, the plaintiff stopped participating in basketball games, including within the club.  After he recovered, the plaintiff returned to play for the club and became a full-fledged player.

2. The period of engagement between the plaintiff and the club is from August 11, 2013 to December 11, 2013, during which time the club served as the plaintiff's main employer. Until the day the amended statement of claim was filed, the plaintiff had received full salary from the club.

On January 10, 2015, a claim was filed with the National Insurance Institute for this accident.  On March 16, 2015, the National Insurance Institute announced that it recognized the plaintiff's injury as a work accident.  Subsequently, the plaintiff's permanent disability was determined to be 10%.

3. The lawsuit was filed against the club and the insurer. The plaintiff claims that the defendants are obligated to compensate him for his bodily damages, jointly and severally, by virtue of Sports Law and by virtue of the engagement agreement entered into between him and the club.

The plaintiff referred to the provisions of the contractual agreement, according to which the team undertakes to compensate the player in the event of an injury that will be recognized as a "work accident" by the National Insurance Institute, and the benefits of the National Insurance Institute and the team's insurance will be available to the player in the event of permanent disability.

4. The insurer claimed that the plaintiff's name is no longer listed on the list of players that the club forwarded to it and therefore he does not have insurance coverage, even if at the relevant times of the accident he was a regular player.
5. The club submitted a request to order a stay of the proceedings in the lawsuit (according to Section 5(a) to the Arbitration Law), insofar as they relate to the club, as this is a lawsuit dealing with contractual aspects of an agreement between a player and a basketball team. The club argued that the resolution of the dispute, in accordance with the provisions of the law and the Supreme Court's ruling, is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Arbitration Institute of the Israel Basketball Association (hereinafter: The Association).

According to what is stated in the application, the plaintiff and the club are parties to the agreement, which constitutes a statutory arbitration agreement by virtue of sections 10 and 11(a) of the Sports Law, 5748-1988 (hereinafter: the Sports Law).  According to the club, what is stated in clauses 7(a) and (b) of the agreement signed by the parties, constitutes an explicit arbitration clause, which grants exclusive jurisdiction to the association to adjudicate any dispute relating to the contract between the parties.