ADVOCATE ISRAEL

.1 Aiskor Facilities Steel Ltd. AE 2734/92
.2 Official receiver AE 2802/92
vs
Shlomo Ness, attorney accountant - Chapter Alcol Ltd. (liquidation)

This document was translated by computer software without human contact, so there may be significant errors in translation: please do not rely on the translation without obtaining appropriate advice with a certified Israeli advocate / lawyer

Supreme Court sitting as a civil appeals court
[9.8.92]
Before Judges A. Barak, S. Levin, T. Light
Companies Ordinance [New Version], תשמ"ג 1983, NK 764, Sections 178, 178 (a), 179 (a) 185, 185 (a), 191, 268 - Bankruptcy Ordinance [New Version], felt "From 1980, NK 639, Section .96 company, the respondent is unpacked, was a land lease rights in the property was subjected to various creditors. Among others was enslaved for a mortgage bill that undermines work force held on .20.7.86 subjection mortgage documents were delivered Registrar of Companies for registration .28.8.68 Registrar of Companies on the mortgage subjection wrote on 14.10.86 registration card out of the same date. On 12.6.88 approach undermines 1 request dissolution against the company, and on 12.6.88 possible dissolution decree against the respondent company was appointed liquidator. Respondent asked the District Court a declaratory ruling regarding the lack of validity of the mortgage to him and other creditors due to delivery of documents relating to the registration after the end twenty-one days regulars Companies Ordinance [New Version], תשמ"ג 1983, registration Shiabodim. Undermines 1 appealed to delete the application on threshold from the point of a secondary listing in its possession, under section 185 (a) Ordinance, Snmtmlau absolute evidence to the registration of all requirements, including the date. The court rejected the request to delete the threshold, and ruled that the Registrar's decision to accede to the request undermines 1, extension of deadline subjection mortgage registration, an application made to him after the decomposition process, is not to change the property rights of creditors of company assets. The court accepted the request, then the Respondent. Hence appeals, turned on the question of validity of the work created by the Company, filed late registration, and the though there was submitted a request to extend the date was recorded by the Registrar of Companies and given him a certificate of registration.

The Supreme Court ruled: N.
A.. (1) Allow a joint attack existing subjection, subjection after picking documents that led to the discovery that it was recorded late in time, is tantamount to giving non-guaranteed creditors Award, which has no justification (299 A).

(2) work created by a company, details of which were submitted for registration after passing twenty-one days after formation, and registered by the Registrar of Companies Certificate of Registration given him work, without having submitted his request discussed extension of time, is valid for the joint (300 g).
(3) Who was damaged due to late registration of the work can contact the appropriate competent court action (300 d).
(4) work created after the breakup Disable under Section 268 Companies Ordinance [New Version], unless the court ordered otherwise. In this case the registration certificate holder subjection not helpful, since Article 185 (a) gives evidence of absolute validity of filling all the requirements regarding the registration and effect of subjection (297 B - C).
At. Can not determine in advance regarding raising the question of whether the time element necessary for making action by the judicial authority or governmental authority to get to the bottom if not (299 b).

Judgments of the Supreme Court mentioned: in
[1] AE 181/73 Stockmann N. Sfitani et al, PD Power (2) .182
[2] AE 1 / 49 Ambor N. Orshitzki et al, PD at .397
[3] HCJ 209/62 Nathan v. Director et al courts, PD Tz 1.995
[4] AE 228/63 Azuz v. helped, PD Iz 2.541

Judgments of the District Courts mentioned: and
[5] TA (TA) 2232/87, um, 7345/88, 7731 David Levy & Sons Ltd. (liquidation) et Union Bank of Israel Ltd, SP Tshm"t (3) .30
[6] dissolution case (TA) 3542/66, 12504/86 102 Hemi - not published.
[7] RA (TA) 3669/92 - not published.

Rulings - Dean Artzisreliim mentioned: N.
And others. Ltd. Soc. Coop "Broch" Levim v. Liquidator of. 26/40C.a [8]. . 346P.l.r7

Rulings - English law mentioned: in
(. C.a) .152. Ch [1908] Brikett, limited & in re Yolland, Husson [9]
[1924] National Provincial and Union Bank of england v. Charnley [10]. (C.a). 431K.b1
. . 20Ch [1966]. Ltd. (Eagelsclieffe) in re Mechanisations [11]
. . 1052Ch [1965]. Ltd. (property) in re eric Holmes [12]
. (. C.a). 442Ch [1971]. In re c. L. Nye ltd [13]
. (. C.a). 177W.l.r 2 [1986] reg. V. Registrar, ex. P. Central bank [14]
.. 381q.b 2 (1893) in re Brall, ex parte Norton [15]
. (. C.a) .. 56L.t 149 (1933) re M.i.g. trust limited [16]


Ruling on appeals of the District Court in Tel Aviv-Yafo (President A. Winograd) dated 14.5.92 Tel Aviv 1143/83. Appeals were received.
J. Levi - named undermines CAC 2734/92;
A Fodmsky, Senior Deputy District Attorney TA (Civil) - named appellant CAC 2802/92; A. Goldenberg, N. Cohen - named respondent.


Stopped - Dean


Justice S. Levin Background
.1 These appeals arising question is, what validity of the work created by a company --
The joint company - details of which were submitted for registration after passing twenty-one days after formation though not filed a request to extend the date of registration is recorded by the Registrar of Companies Certificate of Registration given him work, considerable time before the dissolution proceedings began against the company.
Facts based on which appeals are simple: N. Alcol Company Ltd (hereinafter ¬ company) was a land lease rights in the property known as plot A Class 78 block 6095 (hereinafter - the property). The property was subjected to various creditors. Laiskor among enslaved Steel Services Ltd "m (hereinafter - undermines) by virtue of a mortgage note on the work conducted .20.7.86 subjection mortgage documents were delivered Registrar of Companies for registration on 28.8.86, Cshmctb effects attached to the subject date .12.8.86 Registrar of Companies Registrar the mortgage subjection only on 14.10.86 removed under his registration certificate that date. On 12.6.88 approach undermines dissolution request against the Company, and on 31.10.88 against the company can order the dismantling of the Respondent was appointed liquidator. With the consent of all concerned the property is sold, only 350,196 for it, given that undermines NIS 1 against bank guarantee linked to the dollar and unconditional immediately exercisable by the joint, in effect until the decision of the court proceedings are. The beginning of a process to declare the joint request and order that is valid for him subjection mortgage on the property, therefore undermines the rights of creditors and other priority. undermines appealed to delete outright joint request from the point of a secondary listing in her hand, under section 185 (a) Companies Ordinance [New Version], תשמ"ג 1983, filled with absolute evidence All requirements regarding registration, including the date, therefore the joint can be heard arguing that delay in the registry. Argued that undermines, subjection mortgage documents for registration within the time given permanent command.

Outright deletion request was filed pursuant to an agreement dated 12.8.90 discussions, given the validity of a decision on 23.8.90 (hereinafter - Agreement fiction). Fiction agreement is determined that the hearing file will be broken apart so that the first phase will be discussed the question of interpretation of the provision of Article 185 on the assumption that incorporation papers were filed late. It was further agreed that if the application is rejected outright deletion will be discussed other arguments of the appellant. Bath Power Attorney General ordered the Tel Aviv District Attorney to report to the district court hearing his name is, for country and for the official receiver to claim interest interpretation section 185 (a) above as an expression of support undermines the position, so they did.
.2 Request to delete the threshold found before the learned President of the District Court, and he decided to reject it. Undermines the state (including the official receiver) sought permission to appeal the decision in question, but before decision given the above requests, the learned President Dan second phase of the trial; this matter became clear, that on 6.10.91, ie after the decomposition process, decided to accede to the request of the Registrar of Companies undermines extend the deadline for registration mortgage subjection; President scholar decided that subjection mortgage documents were filed late and that the registrar the power of decision from 6.10.91 to change the property rights of creditors of company assets. So he gave a ruling accepting the joint request. Verdict "swallowed" the decision subject to appeal applications available, and there was more room to discuss them.
Arorihm ahead of the appellant and state the verdict, which they attack both the learned President's decision to request outright rejection (the software returned the ruling) and the decision in the second phase of the trial. With court agreed, Ssichomihm, submitted requests for permission to appeal, will also serve as summaries of claims appeals, and offered us just complete summaries.
I came to the conclusion that we need to address Lhnmkto District Court of the second phase of discussion, because I think, the result reached by the first phase can not stand; Court of Appeals therefore applied.

Framework for discussion
.3 Four sections Companies Ordinance [New Version] Hnormatibit delimit the framework of the issue at hand. Similar to those clauses concerning our purposes: in 178 (a) "work of the listed below, created by a company registered in Israel, will be off the joint and a creditor of the company, if he throws a guarantee on its assets or operating, unless the information set forth in the document creates a lien or to indicate him, if such a document, delivered to the registrar or obtained for him, the said date in section 179, to register as required by this command ...

...............

(2) mortgage of real estate property anywhere, or interest in the property as stated; ......".
179 (a) "provide the date of receipt of the information or document under section 178 is --
(1) No other provision - within twenty-one days after the lien was created; ......".
191 "present Registrar that the registration of the lien at the time of need, or non-impact or disruption of detail relating to Serfdom or remark settlement, occurred by accident or mistake or other sufficient reason, or that does not hurt the situation of creditors or shareholders, or have other reasons Oil justice and integrity to give relief - he may, at the request of the Company or of any person interested, to extend the deadline to register or amend the registration, the conditions are right to show them useful; Registrar rejected the application, the applicant may appeal the decision before the Court within fourteen days From the day he invented the decision ".
185 (a) "Registrar will hand a signed certificate of registration of any lien, which listed the amount promised him; certificate shall be evidence of absolute filled with all the registration requirements.
These appeals disputed question is, if the Certificate Registrar denies the joint claim, mortgage subjection idle because their details were filed late registration time without extending the time.

Ruling of District Court
.4 President repeated his ruling scholar on Hfrofozitzih where the previous flag of his ruling on Tel Aviv (Tel Aviv) 2232/87, um, 7345/88, 7731 [5], which has seen zero registration certificate given by the Registrar of Companies who submitted the late registration documents and requested extension of time. According to this view a section 185 order, but the Certificate of Registration issued by Registrar authority --
"Since Registrar was not authorized to register the pledge and get the certificate after passing 21 days without having submitted to him decided on his request to extend time under section 191, the actions became deviation authority as were zero. Accordingly, the registration certificate Maikra idle, ie - no certificate, in the absence Certificate - There are no question of Article 185 given absolute proof that ...".
The District Court ignored the ruling did not contradict English, relies on the versions they
Almost identical formula command, but he did not see himself tied to this ruling, the issue was not the opinion of the judges English to be accepted "all capture the essence of the case may be misconceived. He also wrote the president learned that the English ruling later was not satisfied with the result it reached the English judges in the past, and English law amended in the sense that Shkonklusibiot lost possession of it, and now England can also attack the registration certificate as an administrative act of another.
President scholar explained his perspective both flavors language relevant sections of the policy and flavors. He emphasized wording of Section 178 adopted legislative language categories, determining to Serfdom, which was recorded at the time, you will cancel and not just be canceled because the date of twenty-one days is determined on the primary legislation and regulations and therefore has the force of fundamental law, the reasons listed also extend deadline They are about the legislation, as opposed to leaving it consideration the opinion of the Registrar, requesting that making interpretation of Article 185 would be to empty the Section 191 software; In short: and the absence of exercise of discretion by the Registrar, whether to extend the deadline, the exam given discretion on appeal the District Court under section 191 of the Ordinance, has exceeded his authority Registrar. The District Court also rejected the alternative contention of the appellant, which has run the strongest absolute subscriber section 185 (a) of the Ordinance only to the side of his interest was born after the registration subjection, as opposed to receiving interest from company assets before listing subjection. Not only that - he thought the District Court that supported ¬ wording of Article 185 (a) diagnosis in question, but rejected the claim also for reasons of policy. So wrote the President learned section 14 ruling: N.
"The purpose of registration with the Registrar of Companies Hsabodim is that anyone who intends to come to a business relationship with the company could look to discover the company's Hsabodim map. ... Map of liens that can serve the same considerations of whether to enter any business with the company and to what extent and if not, whether to sell the company merchandise credit if not long-term considerations and so on. Of course, liens map 'is used all accompanied by the applicant to give the company its money and make its creditor, the creditor in exchange for safe and normal. From the record of slavery may have had implications for the rights of different people. Anyone who faces the same map liens know, under a legal fiction that a period of 21 days prior to the date his application - which may have created yet another lien was recorded and may harm the rights - but this fiction can be for a period exceeding 21 days. Therefore lien recorded outside limits of 21 days - must extend the time anyway ... Registrar of Companies protects the rights of that person by the conditions he imposes on the rights acquired by him during the interim period.
Hence - President outlook scholar - has to justify the joint interpretation of Section 185 (a), void of subjection to the joint can deviate from it only if the Registrar has extended the deadline under section 191, which was not done in this case.


English law
.5 No dispute that we are not already connected to the ways of the English, even when the law English law provisions identical or similar command them; but I was hesitant to set as determined by the President learned, that "all perception (of the English judges - that 'to') the essence of the matter "is" misconceived ". This six English sentences, contradicting the view of the learned President, from the beginning of the century until 1985, verdicts rendered by judges at the time great with a wide knowledge of law and commercial companies, starting guard scrolls hardy-Cozens Judge Fletcher Moulton ruling, in re Yolland [9 ] (1908) Birkett, limited &, Husson Scrutton and judges - Atkin case [10] (1924). National Provincial and Union Bank of england v. Charnley saw four other cases: In ltd (Eagelsclieffe) in re Mechanisations. In re C.l; [12] (1965). Ltd. (property) in re eric Holmes; [11] (1966) [14] (1986) reg. V. Registrar, ex. P. Central bank; [13] (1971) ltd .. nye below Afrt some ways exceeding reading four of the six judgments mentioned above.
(A) case [9] Brikett, limited &, Yolland Hasson explained keeps scrolls, judge-hardy, Cozens counterpart of the legislative purpose of section 185 (a) of the Ordinance was to prevent a situation of uncertainty in terms of who Sltobto Created work, if not the certificate was unable to prove that terms and conditions contained in this section filled; those words, p. 160: and I can not bring myself to doubt that it would be almost shocking if we "held in this case that the certificate of the registrar, which is Holders in saying that they had as against the unsecured actually Indorsed on each of these Debentures, did not justify the-Debenture. Creditors represented by the Liquidator, a perfectly good change "upon the assets of the company, however, refrained from raising saver scrolls Mlkboa any interest question, what works of certificate for different types of creditors are guaranteed the mutual relationship between them.
(B) case [10] National Provincial and Union Bank of england explained to the judge, Scrutton on page 1447, one of the reasons enact counterpart of Section 185 is a must do by law registry rests on the company and who is credited subjection, and the goal was to prevent the attack subjection, If it became clear that the company or Register wrong registration information. Honorable Judge pointed out, the language of Section 178 counterpart is awkward, because the cancellation depends on avoiding subjection shipping details, and avoiding listing subjection. Thus came the certificate L"c Essays cases of misunderstanding or a mistake. Balance between a stranger's reliance on the corrupted registry and the danger thereof
If creditors promised land under Lbtohtm Tishmt, registration details are not controlled, the legislature favored the interests of the latter.
(C) ruling regarding [13]. C.l. nye ltd summarized all previous practices. Determined there, on duty, she had written only to make sure that all the details involved in the registry, including the date of filing incorporation papers, filled; rejected the claim, and receive the registration information after the passage of time and expenses on his registration certificate, exceeded his authority Registrar.
(D) the case - [14] registrar, ex. P. Central bank filed Registrar of Companies for registration within a period of twenty-one days, unlawfully, not original documents; documents were returned to the sender, but after invented the original documents and had twenty-one days have passed and began proceedings against the company's dissolution, was recorded original subjection. Court of Appeals ruled, the Registrar erred perform an Oslnosh listing status can be guaranteed to get the mistake, but counterpart of Section 185 prevents him from bringing evidence of its existence.
Says now, this ruling seems problematic not go in determining the general, but upon leaving the assumption that even if the creditor should be seen as non-guaranteed hit by mistake (and because he invented the original documents at the time and no record was performed after the decomposition process started), not given due relief provisions of Section 185 (to the point that more will return later). But subject to say here, the English seem practices reflect the same interests and want them to come to Section 185 (a) server.
.6 A plaintiff lawyer I did not find support for the president to determine the scholar, the late English case law is the same reservations about the ways I have mentioned, maybe except for the hem of one way affair [12]. Ltd. (property), eric Holmes on page 1072, in which the judge expressed the opinion Pennycuick, that takes the law also gives protection to the registry is wrong, even achieved Bmirmh. The learned President's statement, due to legislative changes made recently lost Hkonklusibiot English law of the strongest, based not enough. Although, as explained in - Annotated statutes of 1989, p. 40-117, thought the draft law was submitted to parliament to cancel altogether the strongest Hkonklusibit Subject counterpart of section 185, but in the end, in light of the resistance correction, compromise the British Parliament, which expressed Section 94 (5) of the Companies Law in English in the new arrangement .1989 Info not seem to touch our purposes, and therefore not treat the English law received repairs attacks recently.

Israeli practices
.7 Recall, the President repeated the learned decision on statements made by him earlier in Tel Aviv (Tel Aviv) 2232/87, um, 7345/88, 7731 [5], already mentioned above. There was something that was on 5.2.87
הצג סקריפט אנגלי
The company signed a bill in favor of respondent on the first mortgage, which was recorded in the Land Registry office on .5.4.87 time for filing incorporation papers ended 26.4.87, which was not filed until that date. On 28.6.87 submitted a request to dismantle the company, and on 6.6.88 can be against dissolution decree. Only On 30.7.87 the Respondent sent a request to register the mortgage book listing Hshiabodim with a request to extend the deadline, and on 29.9.87 a Certificate of Registration expense of subjection. Dan apparently not there at all please Register deadline extension. Joints sought to determine, despite the subjection cancel the registration certificate, and the court accepted the arguments of those who have underlying decision to issue this appeal. What's between those cases and the case before us? In both cases created subjection before the breakup, but that case was recorded subjection after the breakup, and I have no need to comment if this fact distinguishes between two cases. Another question could arise subjection to him was created after the breakup. Pursuant to Section 268 of the Ordinance idle every deal made after the liquidation, unless the court ordered otherwise; In this case the certificate was not beneficial owner of subjection, since Article 185 (a) gives evidence of absolute validity of filling all the requirements regarding the registration, no effect of subjection.
Besides the learned President's decisions have no other support for his approach went.
AE 26/40 [8] expressed an opinion counter; and other court decisions rendered in two District Court by Chief Justice H. Avnor, 3542/66 dissolution case, um, 12504/86 [6], and by Justice M. Porat Bbr"a (TA) 3669/92 [7]. is, that the question before us is still open to a legal decision.

Literal interpretation
.8 Question of the relationship between sections 178 (a) and - 179 (a) on the one hand and section 185 (a) On the other hand is a question of interpretation, the solution can not be analyzing the language of these provisions only; For example, even the interpretation of speech "Cancel" are inconclusive. For example, teaching interpreted Article 96 Bankruptcy Ordinance [New Version], 1980, stating that granting assets would be "idle" (void) to the trustee, it is giving it "refundable" (Voidable). See [15] ( 1893). Brall re, ex parte Norton although it is not: N. subjection of thing being "Cancel" which is to prevent the resurrection retrospective if given the extension deadline for submitting registration information. The fact that the date of twenty-one days is determined on the primary legislation does not necessarily give "Priority" sections 178 (a) and ¬ 179 (a) the provision of Article 185 (a) does not necessarily give her "the force of substantive law" (to the point that I do not see very significant distinction between the substantive law on trial hearings). which determine accepting plaintiff's interpretation of Article 185 of the Ordinance may empty the Article 191 of us, may argue with equal logic, accepting respondent's interpretation may empty the Section 185 (a) software (and - if one assumes, as the president put law scholar, between "the registration requirements "Also include the date of registration). but I think even one of the two approaches may not promote us to resolve the issue before us. the question of what validity of the Certificate of Registration issued after the deadline for request for extension without hearing date Should be no authority, though it raises a question of interpretation, have to decide it according to considerations of policy.


Considerations of policy and purpose of the legislation
9 In my opinion, is only partially true thesis of the President learned about the existence of liens Map "which could see anyone. First, the power of "Hsabodim map" to discover the existence of slavery in the twenty-one days between doing it and filing incorporation papers Registrar of Companies; Second, even if the registry documents were filed at the Registrar prescription subjection (by mistake or for other reasons), would not reveal the alien existence of subjection; Third, if the Registrar has extended the deadline for submission of registration documents, a retrospective extension works, and would not reveal stranger see "the existence of subjection If Iaein pad Hshiabodim before extension; For example, if you paused the debate before the Registrar, please extend Meanwhile date recorded another work, could not find a subjection other notebook Hshiabodim examination of the existence of the first subjection; is, the provisions of Section 178 (a) and - 179 (a) were not necessarily protect him "interested" to find out what the applicant's condition company, but indirectly, although this result must be registered and fourth, as already explained, the legislative history shows that these clauses, the basic purpose was different than he thought President scholar.
.10 The result which came President scholar does not seem to me desirable. Particular, the spring pad Hshiabodim find assets recorded on the first work relying on the registry is getting work for the company, two promotions, what allow him to taste, Csntbrr subjection first registered late, to claim the dissolution of the company, the first subjection "Cancel"? Anyone who can get hurt from the registry is just the latest who changed the situation worse relying on lack of registration. Subjection to a first petitioned to extend the date for submission of registration documents, the court was present, as is customary, the extension provided subjection not affect the rights of other creditors purchased now, now, when it was done, has to find a way to protect his interest; but even if such terms was conditional , conventional wisdom is that the provision protects only the rights Hftza company assets rather than ordinary creditors. Point was explained to the CAC 181/73 [1], where the president relied mm, the late Judge Sussman, p. 186, the Justice Romer in --
[16] (1933) re M.i.g trust limited as follows: In
"... If avoiding a pledge not recorded from seeking court permission to register late, and taking this pledge under the new record, ordinary creditors was rejected in their entirety, as guaranteed creditor was paid to them, even though the company already owes them when she was working his assets . Therefore there is no justification prefer him, because I'm late, ordinary creditor, even right born of the same creditor for a period of late ".
This issue also saw the ruling of the case - [14] registrar, ex. P. Central bank above, p. .185
Come and See the case before us: and we do not know if the Registrar had accepted the request undermines extend time for filing incorporation papers had been filed at least before the breakup; but if it was not accepted, there was nothing preventing the company from doing work for a new, identical, and submit the registration documents about
Time. No interest of ordinary creditors was not offended that, in terms of the desired law allowing joint attack existing subjection, subjection after picking documents that led to the discovery that it was recorded late in time, is examining providing non-guaranteed creditors Prize, no, I think, every justification.

Certificate granted without application to extend the deadline
I came to the conclusion .11, verbal interpretation of the provisions of sections 178 (a), 179 (a) and -185 (a) does not require, necessarily, the conclusion of the learned President, the historical background of Hakiktm indicates precisely the opposite result. Moreover, it seems to me, a legal policy considerations require the receipt of a proper appeal. I had more to discuss whether the president thinks right, wait for registration certificate without submitting a request to extend the date of the same nullity. In my opinion, can not determine in advance regarding raising the question of whether the time element necessary for making action by the judicial authority or governmental authority to get to the bottom if not; Thus, for example, stopped in the past, the absence of authority to extend deadlines law has ignored the decision of a judge who gave permission to appeal on the basis request filed late Time: N AE 1 / 49 [2]; However Cshusmc court to extend times prescribed enactment, confiscating a decision no longer given, without protest, delay time of a void flaw, although given on the basis of a request filed late or no time Request to extend deadline: HCJ 209/62 in [3]. For this purpose I do not accept the general form of the Respondent's argument, she left this latest power only for good decision given by a court or by administrative authority, but has no interest in examining the circumstances, both when he wakes up before the court and when he wakes up before an administrative authority.
Many times a given solution to the question of whether a particular defect factual element get to the bottom if not authority, both legal considerations of policy such as Hmigzrim; here, the reasons already mentioned, no case requires proper legal policy set, wait a registration certificate without submitting a request to extend the deadline beyond authority; the fact, contained in Section 191 list of reasons setting the deadline can be extended, there is nothing to question authority, and also includes a list of arguments also section doings ( "There are other reasons of justice and integrity to give oil aid"). Indeed, what is the difference between the case before us and the hypothetical case where Dan was to extend the deadline please Register and decides to accede to it without explanation or explanations are not correct, then even according Dasoft learned it was not a decision that lacks authority. There emphasize, in both cases there is no one hit allowed, by the language of Section 191, to appeal the District Court decision that receives the request. Mazzi if to say, something that is loaded before us, the mole was the Registrar to hold a hearing inter partes request to extend the date on which invite anyone who might be harmed and nothing was there decision to cancel the decision that harms principles of natural justice, then this argument can not be heard from the joint, since The certificate was presented before the breakup and before the appointment of joint, and can not be heard even from non-guaranteed creditors, who - as Sntbar - can not be considered a "person interested" or who might get hurt on - by the decision.
As a result of the above is, teaching the Big tasks "included in section 178 (a) is denied, allegedly because the" discussion "can Serfdom with providing registration certificate under section 185 (a).


Interested person's drug
.12 The result, given by the Registrar Registration Certificate, violates the right of "interested person", without given a chance to get the injury, does not seem to me satisfactory. Register before it was discussed - before the breakup - a request to extend time, he was to qualify the extension, as is customary, no overtime to harm creditors' property rights created in the meantime. What medications the claimant, between the time received credit for work from a company and then found him, the due date extension or subjection previous owner was granted registration card late time, there is work before hitting his rights and that he did not know him? About the - [14] registrar, ex. P. Central bank set, recall, the Court of Appeals, in light of the teaching section corresponding to section 185 (a) of the Ordinance remained who injured without remedy. In my opinion, the result in question is not desirable nor necessary, just the respondent explained that she comes from, apparently, Mrtiatm of the courts in England and opinionated interfering discretion of administrative authorities far beyond the norm in Israeli courts.
It should be remembered that until 1980 but the court was given authority to extend deadlines for submission of registration documents. Indeed, he remained in power by the court, there was no doubt about it, limiting the right to appeal only in cases where the deadline extension request was denied would not have prevented an appeal by the plaintiff was damaged due to receipt of the request and AE 228/63 [4], and if not Dean was a competent court ¬ appeal to cancel the results of granting the certificate to him if it violates his rights. The result can not, in my opinion, be different, Cshsmkot extend the deadline was moved to the registrar, then the drug of "interested person" is to the appropriate competent court action ( gesture here and I question what is an opinion regarding the appropriate competent court).
The proposed solution on my hands seems preferable alternative solution proposed by the respondent, and - determine that the registration certificate validity relative not only to those injured due to Netanya.
.13 Final note: President N. scholar expressed the fear that drives the Registrar of Companies registration certificates to all without regard to the dates of filing and registration information Hshiabodim when he was late in submitting this information, he added, in
"I hope that this procedure but only case (though this is already the second case that I discussed it).

These things I agree.
Result from the above is a company created to Serfdom, details of which were submitted for registration after passing twenty-one days after formation, and registered by the Registrar of Companies Certificate of Registration given him work, without having submitted his request discussed extension of time, is valid for the joint.

I accept the appeals, cancel the verdict of the District Court rejects the joint request. Undermines the joint pay attorneys' fees 000, 60 NIS.


5129371 Justice A. Barak: and I agree.

Justice T. Or: I agree.
In his ruling, as was decided by Justice S. Levin. Given today, Y. Av Tsn"b (9.8.92).

f