Co-owners of real estate executed a real estate partnership agreement but did not record it, nor recorded a cautionary notice in respect thereof, with the Land Registry. About five years later one of the owners sold his holdings to a third party in an agreement that does not give notice of the partnership agreement. The Court held that registration of a land partnership agreement gives it proprietary validity, i.e. validity also vis-à-vis third parties who were not a party to it. However, there are circumstances in which although a land partnership agreement was not duly recorded it will still apply to a third party if such third party about it or turned a blind eye. The purchase of land under joint tenancy is supposed to place a "warning sign" for the purchaser, and therefore an examination of the land registry alone may provide a very partial and sometimes incorrect picture regarding agreements as to the state of the rights in the land and the purchaser should check whether there is any land partnership agreement. In this case the purchaser purchased a specific part of the land and was expected to know that the real estate is shared and thus he cannot purchase a specific part unless there is a land partnership agreement and therefore the land partnership agreement applies to the purchaser.
Published in Afik News 241 11.10.2017
Related articles
Upon non-publication of financial statements at the expiration of the initial suspension period the company is transferred to the maintenance list
Capital Markets and Stock Exchange Regulations
Dispute Resolution
A public company which shares were suspended from trading on TASE due to non-publication of financial statements petitioned at the last minute against the transfer of its shares to the maintenance list after the three months of suspension had lapsed. The company sought a short delay contending that the statements would be published soon, but […]
A significant delay in the delivery of an apartment may justify the cancellation of the purchase agreement and the realization of the Sale Law guarantee
Real estate in Israel and around the world
Dispute Resolution
Two families purchased apartments from a developer. After the developer ran into financial difficulties and a receiver was appointed to complete the project, they sought to cancel the purchase agreement and forfeit the Sale Law guarantees in their possession due to a significant delay in delivery and given the fact that they can no longer […]
A company providing service and support in Israel to a foreign company may be considered its representative for the purpose of service of process in Israel
International Transactions and Disputes and Israeli “Soft Landing”
Dispute Resolution
A client whose investment account with a foreign company was blocked, served a statement of claim to the Israeli company through which the account was opened. The Israeli company contended that it is not authorized to receive service of process on behalf of the foreign company since it only provides technical support. The Court held […]
A non-compete clause does not automatically become void upon termination of the contract but will be evaluated in light of the circumstances
Commercial, Banking and Financial
Dispute Resolution
A store chain owner suspected that one of the franchisees secretly became a shareholder in a competing store chain using his brother as a “straw man”. Following these suspicions, the chain terminated the franchise agreements for two branches and for the third branch demanded to activate a “forced separation” mechanism due to “breach of trust.” […]