In addition, the defendant claimed that the appraiser's assessment of the damage that was attached to the statement of claim was incorrect, included an erroneous and double calculation of damages, and from this it is not at all clear why a delay period of 6 years was determined.
In support of his position, he also attached an appraiser's opinion.
- At the evidentiary hearing, the plaintiff, the plaintiffs' appraiser, Mrs. Tamar Avraham, the defendant and the appraiser on his behalf, Mr. Erez Cohen, were questioned.
The parties submitted their summaries and now the time is ripe for a judgment.
Does the lawsuit have a statute of limitations?
- The defendant argued that the lawsuit should be dismissed in limine since the date on which the settlement was submitted for court approval was at the end of October 2012 and it received the validity of a judgment on October 30, 2012.
- There is no dispute that the plaintiffs were not part of the second proceeding in the Family Court, which ended with the validity of the mediation arrangement, and were not part of the parallel proceeding conducted in the court in Ramle, which dealt with the annulment of the first judgment.
Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim that they were exposed to the contradiction between the first judgment and the second judgment was not contradicted only with the submission of the division plan and the committee's decision, from which it emerged that there was a contradiction between the judgments - and this proceeding began in 2016.
Therefore, there is no room for a claim of limitation in light of the provisions of section 8 of the Statute of Limitations, 5718-1958, according to which "the facts constituting the cause of action disappeared from the plaintiff, for reasons that were not dependent on him, and which he could not have prevented even with reasonable care, the limitation period will begin on the day on which the plaintiff became aware of these facts."
- The same applies to claims of delay - as is well known, the court will order the dismissal of a claim in limine for reasons of delay where the defendant suffered significant damage that does not allow him to defend himself against the lawsuit (see this matter Civil Case (Nazareth District) 37752-05-24 Ali Sa'ab' Israel Land Authority (19.12.2024);Civil Case in Fast Track (Shalom Jerusalem) 50656-05-14 Shirbit Insurance Company in Tax Appeal v. Yishai Yosef Levy (1.12.2017)).
- I did not find that In our case, the defendant's ability to defend himself before the prosecution was significantly reduced, certainly where most of the plaintiffs' claims are based on documents before The court and their legal interpretation.
If the court later finds that the defendant suffered evidentiary damage as a result of the delay, the matter will be taken into account and detailed; However, the timing of the filing of the claim does not justify its dismissal in limine.