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
A company’s monetary debt does not, in itself, justify piercing the corporate veil or attributing the company’s debt to the shareholder personally
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
A radio station operator demanded that a shareholder of an advertising company personally bear the debt accumulated by the company for advertising services provided to it. The Court rejected the claim against the shareholder and held that the extreme conditions justifying the piercing of the corporate veil were not proven. Piercing the corporate veil is […]
Initial ownership belongs to the creator who designed the work, not the technical executor, unless otherwise agreed
Copyright, Trademarks Media and Artists
Dispute Resolution
A malfunction in a drone belonging to a press photographer, who had arrived to cover the clock repair at the Jaffa Clock Tower, forced him to seek the assistance of a repair company employee to execute the shot. Consequently, the company and the employee sought recognition as the copyright holders of the photograph. The Court […]
Football player salaries in the Premier League in Israel include rest day and holiday compensation
Latam – Spain – Israel Activities
Labor Law
Dispute Resolution
A Brazilian football player playing in the Israeli Premier League demanded from his team, after termination of his employment, payment of compensation for work on weekly rest days and on holidays. The Labor Court found that the team does not need to pay compensation for work on weekly rest days and on holidays. As a […]
Withdrawing a bid after being declared the winner may grant the tender committee the authority to forfeit the bid guarantee
Public Law, Elections Law and Tenders
Dispute Resolution
A bidder that won an Israel Land Authority tender for a lease of a plot withdrew its bid, contending that essential information regarding the scope of building rights had been concealed. The tender committee forfeited ILS 400,000 of the bid guarantee (approximately 25% of the total guarantee). The Court rejected the petition and held that […]