Heirs Must Pay Buyer ₪140,000 for Property Liens

Four siblings who inherited and sold an apartment in Be'er Sheva for ₪1.4 million will pay the buyer ₪140,000 in agreed-upon damages. The payment is due because liens were placed on the property due to one sibling's debts, and these were only removed after many months. Be'er Sheva Magistrate's Court Judge Racheli Tikteen Adulam ruled that the responsibility for clearing the property of encumbrances lay with the sellers, and that the delay constituted a fundamental breach of the agreement.

The buyer, Oshri Yermahayev, purchased the apartment from sellers Maila Zarian, Arieh Deai, Mordechai Deai, and Assaf Day. After taking possession, it was discovered that liens had been registered against the property due to the fourth sibling's debts: one from the Tax Authority and another from the Tel Aviv Municipality. According to the ruling, the Tax Authority lien was placed in January 2022 and removed in October of the same year, after nine months. The municipality's lien was placed in May 2022 and was only cleared in October 2023, a year and five months later. The property rights were only registered in the buyer's name in May 2024.

The sales agreement stipulated that the sellers commit to removing any liens within 14 days, and that a delay of 40 days would be considered a fundamental breach, with a stipulated compensation of ₪140,000 for such a violation. The judge determined that the duration the liens remained on the property far exceeded the contractual limit.

The sellers argued, among other things, that the buyer himself delayed the transaction by returning mortgage documents late. The judge did find that the documents were signed beyond the stipulated five business days, but ruled this did not absolve the sellers of their obligation. She stated, "Those who were obligated by the agreement to ensure the removal of the encumbrances, at their expense... were the sellers."

The judge also noted that the defense's claim that the municipality's lien "was expected to be removed in the coming days" was inaccurate, as it remained for an additional seven months. Furthermore, the judge held the defendants accountable for not presenting Koral Peretz and Adv. Rosenberg, who were involved in the deal, as witnesses, suggesting their testimony would have been unfavorable. The sellers' request to reduce the compensation amount was also denied, as the claim was raised too late in the proceedings without supporting evidence.

While the buyer was awarded the ₪140,000 in stipulated damages and ₪30,000 in legal fees plus reimbursement of court costs, his additional claim for ₪20,000 for emotional distress was rejected. The judge ruled that the stipulated damages were intended to cover the breach's losses, and no separate compensation was warranted for this category.