Heirs Lose Protected Tenancy Rights to Haifa Store After Legal Blunder
A Haifa court has ruled against seven heirs who sought to overturn a default judgment evicting them from a store where their mother held protected tenancy rights. The property owners, Dana Sarah Gordon and Nadav and Miriam Rotfeld, sued the estate of the late Majida Hudda, arguing her protected tenancy rights expired upon her death. Hudda had inherited the protected tenancy from her late husband, the original tenant, under Israel's 1972 Tenancy Protection Law.
After the heirs failed to file a defense, a default judgment was issued on July 5, ordering them to vacate the store. The heirs then filed a motion to cancel the judgment, claiming their failure to respond was due to a misunderstanding among the seven siblings, each assuming another would handle the legal filing. They also argued they had a strong defense, asserting their right to inherit their mother's status under Section 23(b) of the law, and that one heir residing in the U.S. never received the lawsuit.
The property owners countered that the heirs were aware of the proceedings and actively participated, citing requests for hearing postponements and agreements to court orders filed by their legal representative. They argued this demonstrated a coordinated legal strategy, not a communication breakdown.
Judge Inbal Keren dismissed the heirs' motion, finding their explanation for the default unconvincing. She noted that the heirs acknowledged receiving the lawsuit and being aware of the proceedings. The judge also found no evidence to support the claim that the U.S.-based heir did not receive the documents. Furthermore, the court examined the merits of the defense, concluding that protected tenancy rights can only be inherited once. Since Hudda was already the first inheritor, her children would need to meet strict conditions, including continuing the business and relying on it for their livelihood, which they failed to prove.
The court upheld the original eviction order and ordered the heirs to pay 5,000 shekels plus VAT in legal costs. The ruling highlights the difficulty of rectifying procedural errors and the importance of ensuring defenses are filed, rather than relying on others.
