"This is an application that was filed jointly as an opening injunction and as an urgent request for a temporary injunction, in which the applicant petitions to order the cancellation of the decision of the Football Association and the Supreme Court of the Football Association..."
See also Opening Stimulus (Tel Aviv) 10313/99 The Club for the Promotion of the German Shepherd Dog and Service in Israel v. The Israeli Kennel Association [published in the Nevo database] (May 31, 2001).
- This customary practice of filing a civil proceeding with an opening motion was enshrined in the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of High Court of Justice 7755/08 Hapoel Tel Aviv Sports Club v. Supreme Court of the Football Association [published in the Nevo database] (September 11, 2008), and I will quote:
"The respondents do not fulfill a public function according to the law, and the petition does not deal at all with the exercise of any administrative or public powers, which are within the jurisdiction of this court, sitting as the High Court of Justice (see High Court of Justice 4010/98 Hapoel Kabul Team v. Israel Football Association (unpublished, June 25, 1998)). Therefore, insofar as the Petitioner has arguments against the conduct of the Respondents, these should be clarified in the Civil Court, within the framework of the powers granted to him to intervene in decisions of this kind (see, for example, Civil Appeal 674/89 Turten v. Israel Sports Association, IsrSC 45(2) 718 (1991)). " (my emphasis - G.H.).
- This procedural method of filing a civil lawsuit as a procedural means of attacking the decision of the internal institution, or a judgment of the internal court, has remained in place even in the regime of the new Rules of Procedure, see, for example, Civil Case (Tel Aviv) 76264-12-24 Hapoel Be'er Sheva Football Club v. Israel Football Association [published in the Nevo database] (March 30, 2025).
- It is clear that the procedure for conducting a civil lawsuit in the manner prescribed in the new Civil Procedure Regulations is not suitable for attacking a decision or judgment of an internal institution of a sports association. The assault proceeding is essentially similar to a petition to the High Court of Justice, or an administrative petition to the Court for Administrative Affairs, on limited grounds of lack of authority, violation of the rules of natural justice, and extreme unreasonableness, and the procedure established for a civil claim is not suitable for this type of procedure.
Thus, in the framework of a proceeding to challenge a judgment of the Supreme Court, there is generally no room for preliminary proceedings, and even the presentation of evidence will be done only in the rarest cases.