The Supreme Court this morning rejected an appeal filed against the decision of the court in Dimona regarding the disqualification of a judge.
And a few more articles I wrote:
- Financial sanction on the Israel Postal Company Ltd."For breach of order…
- The tax authority confiscated luxury vehicles in Jadeida, Makr and Abu Sanan
- A taxi driver sold a rape drug to a police officer
- Indictment for sexual offenses on 100 minors in Tiktok TIKTOK
- Class actions and a bit of execution
- President Isaac Herzog met with the Prime Minister…
- Michael Penn under house arrest, will not be extradited to Lara in the meantime"In mediation …
- Robbed the money of complainants who came to buy coins from them …
- Disqualification of a judge and wearing a mask in public space
In accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court, the parties are conducting proceedings in the Small Claims Court in Dimona (T."K72223-10-21). On November 21, 2121, the Small Claims Court (the Honorable Justice M. Shahak) rejected the petitioner’s request that he disqualify himself from hearing the proceedings (hereinafter: the disqualification decision). In its disqualification decision, the Small Claims Court clarified that its decision can be appealed before the Honorable President of the Supreme Court within 14 days of its receipt.
On 1.12.2021, the petitioner sent to the secretariat of this court a copy of the decision of the disqualifications by fax without any appendices or writs attached to it. It should be noted that on the margins of the copy of the disqualification decision, the petitioner stated in her handwriting: "Appeals!". The court secretariat informed the applicant that this application was not in accordance with the rules of procedure, and that insofar as the applicant is interested in filing an appeal, it must do so in accordance with the relevant procedural rules (presented in great detail in the secretariat’s letter). On 13.12.2021 the petitioner filed the application before me in which it petitions for an extension of time to file an appeal of the disqualifications.
After the Supreme Court has considered the application it has come to the general conclusion that its case should be dismissed. It is sufficient to state in this context that the reasons for the application are comprehensive and are not supported by any affidavit or reference. Docu, for the purpose of granting an extension of time to take proceedings, the initiator of the proceedings is required to present to the court "Special flavors" Justifying the granting of the requested extension (Regulation 176 (b) of the Civil Procedure Regulations, Nine"T-2018). The application before us is a long way from the said continuum, and the Supreme Court came to this conclusion even after giving its opinion that the applicant is not represented. It should also be borne in mind that in examining requests for an extension to file an appeal of disqualification, a cautious and restrictive approach is taken in any case (see, e.g."A. 9014/16 Yitzhak v. Bitan (18.12.2016).
The application is therefore denied. If no answer is requested, no order for expenses will be made.