"The sequence of events and proceedings over the past seven years leads to the unequivocal conclusion that only contempt of court proceedings have the power to bring about as a result of the judgment and the decision. Anyone who reads the various proceedings which the respondent adopted, the decisions he made, and comparing them with the result, he found that in the case before us, the appellant succeeded, without any substantive justification, in practice, in acting as if the judgments and decisions had not been given. Difficult for the system The judgment is to accept such a phenomenon. The strength and resilience of the company derives from compliance with decisions and judgments. A person who takes liberty for himself to act as if he has no law Dayan undermines the basic social orders. The court in this case is obligated not only to rescue the oppressed from the hand of his oppressor (and here the respondent is the one who for seven years He tries to divide the property and receive what he is entitled to, by law, as part of his proprietary right... And he is the one who was oppressed by his exploited wife), but also to look at the events from a broader perspective, as someone who is in charge of the rule of law in the State of Israel. The case before us requires the application of contempt of court proceedings. Therefore, in principle, the appellant's appeal should be dismissed and the Magistrate's Court's approach should be adopted."
- The combination of these normative provisions, together with the specific facts of the case before me, leads me to the conclusion that there is justification for using the enforcement means of contempt of court.
- In this context, it is necessary to keep in mind the spirit of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the use of contempt of court proceedings and their purpose. Much has been written on this matter, and I will suffice to quote a small excerpt of the words of Justice Edna Arbel (who was joined by the Vice President, Justice Eliyahu Matza, and Justice Ayala Procaccia) inCivil Appeal Authority 3888/04 Sharbat v. Sharbat, Piskei Din Net (4) 49, at p. 60, opposite letter D:
"The purpose [of the contempt of court proceeding] is to conduct a quick and efficient procedure that will lead to the fulfillment of the court order. Indeed, it is important that court orders be fulfilled on the date set by the court, and especially that their execution is not postponed as a result of contempt or contempt."