It should be remembered that tax laws do not only provide a retrospective response, but they also guide future behavior. This fact is also true with regard to the presumption of the family unit. When the division of the tax burden chosen by the legislature is appropriate, I would suggest not adopting an interpretation that would erode this important public interest of granting tax benefits in accordance with the proper standard set by the law.
- In their statements, the parties briefly referred to the Executive Order 6/2011. I do not find it necessary to elaborate on this matter, in which there are parties here and there, and in any case - the execution order is not binding on the court. I will suffice to note that the respondent rightly noted that in the execution instruction it was clearly determined that the financing of the purchase of a minor's apartment by a relative would not lead to a deviation from the possession of the family unit. At the same time, and as the appellants argued, it is doubtful whether the execution order reflects a clear coherent line on the issue of minors' apartments and the possibility of excluding them from the custody of the family unit, and the respondent would do well to re-examine the matter.
In view of this remark, I would suggest that no expenses be imposed on the appellants.
- Towards the end, I will reiterate what has been written more than once by the courts that dealt with the issue of the presumption of the family unit. This is a complex issue, which the legislature should consider. Complex cases that require a proper solution may also occur in the context of minor children and the presumption of the family unit. The courts will be required to respond to them when they come to their doorstep - and it would be good if the legislature regulates these matters first.
Conclusion:
- For the reasons detailed, I would suggest to my colleagues that the appeal be dismissed.
- I would also suggest that expenses should not be imposed on the appellants, taking into account the lack of sufficient clarity in the execution order and the fact that this is an issue that raises questions that in the circumstances of the case justified their examination.
Ms. Geva Balter, Committee Member: