This issue was comprehensively analyzed, including some criticism, in Dr. Dudi Schwartz's book, Civil Procedure: Innovations, Processes and Trends (Kiryat Ono, 2007), at pp. 115 ff., under the title "The Application of the Basic Laws to Temporary Remedies". I quoted Dr. Schwartz's words, in detail, in my judgment inRequest for Leave to Appeal (Jerusalem) 3284/07 Meirav Felman v. Erez Felman, [published in Nevo], given on March 14, 2008, at paragraphs 204-231 (hereinafter - "the Felman Case").
- With regard to the appointment of a temporary receiver, this constitutional approach was also applied. In order not to prolong the discussion excessively, I will suffice with an analysis of one Supreme Court ruling, with a broader discussion found in the aforementioned book by Dr. Schwartz, pp. 471-477.
- In Parashat Telepaz (Civil Appeal Authority 9911/01 Telepaz Refueling and Investments in Tax Appeal v. Paz Oil Company Ltd., IsrSC 56(6) 550; Hereinafter - "Parashat Telepaz") a dispute arose between the judges with respect to a case in which a monetary claim of ILS 2.7 million was filed by the respondents against the applicants, and the Haifa District Court approved the Registrar's decision regarding the appointment of a temporary receiver for the funds and receipts received, which will be received, at the Applicant's gas station in cash and checks, as consideration for the petroleum products sold at the gas station. The court did so, since it was claimed that the applicants purchased fuel from the respondents, and did not comply with the temporary attachment order issued against them by the court (Name, in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the judgment, at p. 553, between the letters C-Z).
- Justice Dalia Dorner, in the majority opinion, ruled that the appeal should be accepted and the temporary receivership order should be canceled, for the following reasons (The Telepaz, Name, paragraph 5, p. 554, opposite the letter G - p. 555, opposite the letter C):
"The remedy of appointing a receiver is a severe remedy, since by his actions - which are in essence taking over and managing assets - the receiver expropriates a person's control over his property. See: The Roth Case, at pp. 110-111.