(b) A request for a stay of proceedings may be filed in the statement of defense or in some other way, but no later than the day on which the applicant first argued on the merits of the claim.
(c) The court may not delay the proceedings if it deems a special reason that the dispute should not be heard in arbitration."
- In addition, Section 3 of the Arbitration Law states that "an arbitration agreement is invalid in a matter that cannot serve as the subject of an agreement between the parties."
- In accordance with its authority by virtue of the Sports Law, the Football Association has enacted the Arbitration Institute's bylaws, which stipulate that it applies to all players and teams in all leagues. Section 2 of the Rules specifies the issues to be heard by the Arbitration Institute, including disputes relating to the contractual relationship between a player and a team, and Section 3 of the Rules stipulates that all disputes listed will be heard only by the Arbitration Institute. Following the proceedings that took place in the Babayev case, and after a lengthy negotiation process, the bylaws were amended and a unique track was established for the examination of claims concerning cogent labor rights, which includes the appointment of retired judges of the labor courts as arbitrators, subordination to substantive law and the laws of evidence, the obligation to give reasons and publish arbitration awards, and an appeals mechanism with the authority to the Labor Court.
- With regard to claims of a cogent nature, it has been held in the past that cogent rights deriving from protective labor law cannot be waived or stipulated, and therefore the hearing of them cannot be transferred to arbitration (CA (National) 791/05 Katz-Sapir (May 4,2006)). At the same time, the same case law held that when the disputes are contractual in nature, and do not relate to cogent rights deriving from labor laws, it is preferable to clarify them before the arbitration institution.
- In the proceeding before us, the claim includes cogent remedies, discretionary remedies and contractual remedies. Contrary to the plaintiff's claim, the main part of the claim concerns remedies deriving from the employment contract and discretionary components: the cogent components include pension deposits, advance notice pay, severance pay and work pay on Shabbat in the sum of ILS 62,197, the discretionary remedies are compensation for unlawful dismissal without a hearing and breach of the duty of good faith, in the amount of ILS 73,153, and the contractual remedies are a championship grant, retirement compensation and rent fees, in the amount of ILS 149,380.
- In these circumstances, when most of the remedies sought by the defendants do not deal with cogent rights, and in light of the development of the arbitration institution, which provides it with specific expertise and knowledge regarding the causes of action, with a reasoned decision by arbitrators who are retired judges of the Labor Court, based on the presentation of evidence and the substantive law, there is no substance in the plaintiff's claims that the acceptance of the application will lead to a violation of the status of cogent rights. The fact that in the framework of the agreements, which were accompanied by the National Court in the Babayev case, it was stipulated in the bylaws that arbitration awards can be appealed to the Labor Court, indicates that there is a mechanism that ensures judicial supervision. In addition, the Association's position indicates that the Arbitration Institute is already operating in its new format, and judgments have even been issued within its framework.
- In his arguments, the plaintiff refers to the determination of the National Court in the Babayev case that "cogent rights in protective labor law are not subject to arbitration", but the National Court also explained that it applies this determination to the cases before it, since the new provisions that were incorporated in the bylaws, which take into account the unique characteristics of the industry, and which are "intended to change the existing legal situation, cannot apply retroactively to pending proceedings". In other words, the change in the customary rule could not have applied at that time to the two proceedings that were pending before the National Court. As explained elsewhere, "the decision of the National Court in the Babayev case extends to claims that were filed prior to that reform, and in respect of which it was clarified that the cogent arbitration mechanism cannot apply retroactively to proceedings that were pending at the time" (Arbitration Claims (Haifa) 3240-07-26 Hapoel Union Bnei Sakhnin - Association for the Promotion of Sports in Sakhnin - Mimar (dated July 20,2026)).
- In our case, the claim was filed on May 6,2026, i.e., after the amendment of the bylaws that occurred on July 7,2025, and after the new mechanism began to operate at the arbitration institution. The defendant's response also indicates that the plaintiff filed a claim with the arbitration institution on April 12,2026, even before the lawsuit was filed in the case before us, but did not mention this material fact in the statement of claim and in his response to the request. In fact, the plaintiff presents contradictory positions regarding the substantive jurisdiction of the Labor Court, and this raises a question, to say the least. This conduct does not advance the resolution of the dispute, but rather burdens it and does not contribute to the proper and efficient conduct of the proceeding.
Conclusion
- In light of the above, we order a stay of the proceedings in the claim and transfer the dispute to the arbitration institution.
- In the circumstances of the case, each party will bear its own expenses.
Granted today, October 13,2026, in the absence of the parties and will be sent to them.