ישראלי הגיש בקשה לאישור תביעה ייצוגית נגד חברה אמריקאית, זאת על אף שבית המשפט בארה"ב כבר אישר הסדר פשרה עמה באותה סוגיה בארה"ב. בית המשפט העליון קבע, כי על מנת שחברה האמריקאית תבסס קיומו של מעשה בית דין על פסק הדין שניתן בארה"ב להיקלט בישראל על פי חוק אכיפת פסקי חוץ. נקבע, כי בנסיבות דנן יש להכיר בפסק החוץ שניתן בארה"ב הואיל ולבית המשפט הזר הייתה סמכות, להליך הייצוגי היה קשר מהותי לארה"ב וכן טענות התובע הייצוגי לפגיעה בזכות חברי הקבוצה בישראל להליך הוגן כבר נדונו בבית המשפט בארה"ב ונדחו. לאור האמור, הבקשה לאישור תובענה ייצוגית שאושרה בישראל נדחתה ונקבע יש להכיר בפסק הזר המאשר את הסדר הפשרה בהליך הייצוגי בארה"ב כמעשה בית דין לפי הדין בארה"ב המונע פתיחת הליך הייצוגי בארץ.
Published in Afik News 176 15.04.2015
Related articles
Contractual liquidated damages that are above 10-15% of the contract value may not be enforced
Commercial, Banking and Financial
Real estate in Israel and around the world
Dispute Resolution
A Seller of rights in a plot (acquired from a receiver) undertook to complete the recording of the rights in his name within 40 days but the recording was affected only after six years. The purchasers demanded the full liquidated damages stipulated in the contract (ILS 150,000), which constituted approximately 28% of the transaction value. […]
The provisions of an arbitration agreement may be applied to a party who has personally agreed to them, even if they are not a party to the arbitration agreement
Mergers and Acquisitions
Dispute Resolution
International Transactions and Disputes and Israeli “Soft Landing”
As part of a merger transaction in which shareholders in the target company sold their shares to the acquiring company, an Israeli company wholly held by an Australian ASX traded company, the acquiring company undertook to provide a loan for the benefit of the target company. While the share purchase agreements were made only with […]
A framework relationship contract is a general agreement that is open to changes and updates in matters that the parties to the contract have chosen not to settle in advance
Commercial, Banking and Financial
Dispute Resolution
Holders of rights of residential units in a luxury hotel demanded the hotel owners to appoint an internationally renowned management company to manage the hotel as well as refrain from raising the management fees. The Supreme Court held that the agreement is a closed agreement and there is no reason to obligate or prevent the […]
Even if business logic justifies exclusivity of a contract this by itself is sufficient to create an exclusive agreement
Commercial, Banking and Financial
Dispute Resolution
A distributor contended that a manufacture interfered with a contract between itself and a third party for the exclusively distribution of its products, including products manufactured together with the distributor. The Court held that the manufacturer did not commit tortious interference of the contract with the third party. The prima facia tort of tortious interference […]