The Tel Aviv District Court on Monday rejected a petition seeking to force Ramat Hasharon to enforce its municipal bylaw against businesses open on Shabbat, including the Big Glilot shopping complex. The petition was filed by Histadrut HaPoel HaMizrachi and targeted the city and Mayor Itzik Rozenberg, also referred to in the article as Itzik Roichberger. With the municipality’s enforcement policy and its commitment to follow it accepted by the court, the judges said the case had become moot and ordered it erased.
The court also ordered Histadrut HaPoel HaMizrachi to pay Ramat Hasharon 5,000 shekels in legal costs. Rozenberg welcomed the ruling, saying, "I welcome the court’s decision. Ramat Hasharon will remain pluralistic, with freedom of religion and freedom from religion. We will continue to implement the enforcement policy document as we stated." The city is also urging the Interior Ministry to approve a change to the municipal bylaw, saying it has requested updates for years but none have been approved.
The dispute centered on whether the city must enforce a bylaw that opponents say bans businesses from opening on Saturday, while the city argues the law is outdated and no longer matches reality. Big Glilot is one of Israel’s busiest retail centers, drawing about 45,000 visitors every Saturday. Business owners warned that real enforcement could mean fines, major financial harm, and disruption to the complex’s operations.
The original petition was filed in May 2025 by a group of Ramat Hasharon merchants, later joined by Histadrut HaPoel HaMizrachi. They argued that they obey local bylaws and close on Shabbat while Big Glilot benefits from selective enforcement and an unfair commercial advantage. The petition also accused the mayor of openly ignoring his enforcement duties. Big Glilot countered that many businesses in the area have operated on weekends for years, that there are no significant ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods nearby, and that the campaign against it is likely driven by competitors with a financial interest. The company also questioned the timing of the Interior Ministry’s response, which the ministry denied was political, calling it a professional and technical matter.
