According to Section 61 of the Real Estate Law, a condominium is managed according to bylaws that set out the rules between the apartment owners and define their rights and responsibilities in the shared areas. Usually, the “default bylaws” apply unless the owners agree on their own detailed version. This short summary reviews a ruling by the Supervisor of Real Estate Registration on the question of whether an agreed-upon bylaw that says expenses are shared equally also applies to large or unusual renovation costs.
Edited by Adv. Idan Ilani with the assistance of Basil Nakhleh
Case Background
The case deals with how to interpret a bylaw in a condominium in Kfar Saba regarding the division of major renovation expenses. One of the apartment owners (the “plaintiff and counter-defendant”), who owns two apartments, argued that big or unusual expenses—such as extensive renovations—should not be included in the clause that says all common-area expenses are shared equally.
The va’ad bayit (building committee) (“defendant and counter-plaintiff”) claimed that the bylaw requires equal payment for all types of expenses, including major renovations. They also noted that the plaintiff had not paid his share of the renovation.
The discussion focused on Section 5 of the agreed-upon bylaw, which states: “The expenses for the maintenance and management of the common property shall be borne equally by all the apartments.”
The Legal Question
If the condominium bylaws say that common-area maintenance expenses are shared equally, does this also include large and unusual renovation expenses?
Decision of the Real Estate Supervisor
The Supervisor ruled that Section 5 does not differentiate between types of expenses. Since the bylaw does not mention any exceptions, none can be added. Therefore, major renovation costs must also be shared equally by all apartment owners. The Supervisor also addressed the argument that the original intention was to exclude unusual expenses. He ruled that the bylaw must be interpreted according to its clear wording, not based on external intentions that were never written into the document. The ruling emphasized that the bylaw is a binding document, and its wording must be applied as it is, without inventing new categories or exceptions.
The plaintiff (and counter-defendant) was ordered to pay the defendant (and counter-plaintiff) a total of 14,444 NIS, including 2,700 NIS in legal expenses.
(P.T.) 6/290/24, 6/392/24 Yitzhak Weinstein v. The Committee of the Condominium at 16 HaEmek St., Kfar Saba.
Gindi Caspi & Co. is one of Israel’s most prominent law firms in real estate, planning and zoning, and urban renewal. With decades of extensive experience handling complex and large-scale real estate transactions, the firm is consistently ranked among the top-tier firms in these fields by all major rating companies. Notably, the international LEGAL 500 recognized Gindi Caspi & Co. as a Leader in real estate, planning, and zoning and highlighted Adv. Ziv Caspi as a Leading Individual in Israeli law. The firm has also received numerous accolades, including ranking among the top real estate law firms (Dun’stars) in planning, zoning, and urban renewal. It was honored as a “pillar and cornerstone in fulfilling the nation’s vision for building and settling the land.” For five consecutive years, the firm has been ranked first in Israel in the field of urban renewal.
For inquiries, contact [email protected].
