VIII. In their reply, the respondents also refer to the applicants' arguments regarding the prevention of contact between the father and the applicants and the severance of contact between respondents 2-3 and the father, and claim that respondents 2-3 visit the father several times a week, while respondent 1 takes care of him on an ongoing basis.
- Appointing Apot to the Court and its Position
- On February 6,2025, as part of a decision on an application for an injunction filed by the applicants, an injunction was issued prohibiting the exercise of the enduring power of attorney, and in the same decision, the court instructed the Legal Aid Bureau to appoint a representative attorney for the appointee.
- On February 13,2025, she was appointed"Dr. Clarice Dvir as the appointer's representative, and on February 27,2025, she submitted a first notice on her behalf. In the statement, she noted that she had not been able to contact the appointer, despite any requests from family members, and that the respondents' attorney at the time, refused to give her the number and referred her to him"4 Melitz (on this date 77"D. Melitz was not at all informed as a representative in the case).
III. 77"Dvir notes in her statement that she contacted him"D. Melitz informed her that his representation had not yet been arranged, and she asked him to contact him himself"D. Helter, who at the time was informed as the representative attorney, and also contacted Lev"20 applicants, and sought to assist her in locating the telephone numbers of the appointer and respondent 1. 77"D. Dvir states in her statement that on that occasion she was informed that Respondent 1 had been in detention for several weeks and that she had received worrying information that she was continuing to investigate in this matter.
- 77"D. Dvir noted that after she learned that respondent 1 was in detention, she decided to go to the appointer's home and speak with him directly. 77"Dvir updates that she did so and that the appointer received her with a warm welcome, as did the caregiver who stayed with him. 77"Dvir noted that the caregiver took a picture of her and she commented to her about it, and about 15 minutes later, the appointer received an angry phone call from Respondent 2. Attorney Dvir notes that she heard the shouting from beyond the phone line while Respondent 2 instructed the appointer to remove Attorney Dvir from the house.
- Attorney Dvir noted that at this point, the appointer began to cry and get nervous, and she asked him for the phone in order to explain to his son who she was and to remove worry from his heart. 77"Dvir notes that respondent 2 began shouting and threatening her, even though she explained to him that the court had appointed her. It was noted that respondent 2 continued to shout and did not allow the conversation to continue, while stressing the appointer and continuing to shout and try to intimidate attorney Dvir. Attorney Dvir notes that the appointer continued to cry and apologize to her, and in order to make it easier for him, she calmed him down and left the house, and therefore petitioned the court to order that the appointer be brought to her office and allow her to meet him in a neutral place without interruptions.
- In her statement, she further notes that her impression is that a doctor's certificate should be obtained that will clarify the cognitive state of the appointer and whether the confusing state in which he is currently in is crystallizing to the point of impairing his judgment and legal competence.
VII. in a decision dated February 27,2025, and in light of the report of the"D. Dvir that respondent No. 2 allegedly acted to torpedo her visit to the appointer's house, I ordered the submission of a reference by B."as respondents in this matter. Thus, orders were also approved for the disclosure of information and for the purpose of examining the possibility of obtaining medical documents. The court was also required to issue an order prohibiting family members and escorts from filming or filming his wife"Dvir and her work, and it was held that any interference with the course of E's work"Dvir may require the intervention and accompaniment of the Israel Police.