Case Number
HCJ 5931/06
Date Decided
4-15-2015
Decision Type
Original
Document Type
Full Opinion
Abstract
Facts: The appeals focused upon the question of whether properties in East Jerusalem that belong to residents of Judea and Samaria are deemed “absentee property” as defined under the Absentees’ Property Law.
Held: In dismissing the appeals, the Supreme Court held that the Absentees’ Property Law applies to properties in East Jerusalem whose owners, beneficiaries or holders are residents of Judea and Samaria. However, in light of the significant difficulties attendant to implementing the Law in accordance with its language, in general, the authorities should refrain from exercising their statutory authority in regard to such properties except in the most exceptional circumstances, and that even then, only subject to the pre-approval of the Attorney General and a decision by the Government or a ministerial committee appointed by it. The Court’s holdings in this judgment will apply prospectively, and only where no statutory steps have been implemented in regard to the said properties. The holdings of this judgment lead to the conclusion that the specific properties that are the subjects of the appeals are absentees’ property.
Keywords
Administrative Law -- Judicial review, Constitutional Law -- Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, Constitutional Law -- Conscientious Objection, Constitutional Law -- Equality Before the Law, Constitutional Law -- Freedom of Movement, Constitutional Law -- Property Rights, International Law -- Occupied territories, Property
