Shoob & Co. has a sterling reputation, and its client list includes many of Israel’s leading corporate and independent real estate developers and management companies. The Firm has sixteen lawyers, three legal interns, and a department specializing in real estate parcellations (the consolidation and subdivisions of real estate plots) and condominiums. The Firm is unique in the depth of its expertise in real estate law.
The Firm provides clients with full-service transactional representation, from due diligence reviews and advice on all aspects of the purchase of real estate, carrying out the transaction, drafting and negotiating the relevant agreements (including joint venture and financing agreements), through to the planning approval process optimizing the utilization of property, as well as issues with various authorities, including the tax authorities.
The Firm also represents clients in combination transactions and/or all other real estate transactions, including TAMA 38 agreements, and assists in representing clients at the various authorities’ vis-á-vis land rezoning. The Firm advises clients on transactions with contractors, the drafting and negotiating agreements with tenants, handles all matters related to protected tenancy, etc.
The Firm specializes in counseling clients in promoting the approval of straightforward and complex urban building plans and vis-à-vis real estate consolidations and subdividing land for rights holders after agricultural property has been rezoned for construction and complex procedures that require working in conjunction with the tax authorities and urban planning authorities and understanding the true value of real estate.
The Firm’s Clients
Shoob & Co.’s client list includes public and private real estate companies, construction companies, other companies, institutional bodies, banks, financial institutions, clients from the ultra-orthodox sector, and private clients.
Handling Complex Real Estate Issues
Over time, the Firm has in complex real estate issues, such as
• Large real estate plots with multiple owners, in the western portion of Rishon Le’Zion, Bat Yam, the Yarkon suburbs, Pi Glilot, Tel Aviv’s Summayl Complex, Netanya, Ha’Gush Ha’Gadol, Ha’Aleph Compound, H/500 and more.
• Managing compensation claims for claimants vis-à-vis planning and construction authorities because of damages from the approval of an Urban Building Plan (Article 197) or expropriation.
– Facilitating reductions in betterment levies.
– Appeals against building and planning, administrative objections
–Counsel vis-à-vis formulating development agreements.
– Complex partnership liquidation issues.
Representation Before All Judicial Instances
Shoob & Co. represents clients before all relevant judicial instances in the real estate world, including local committees, appeals committees on the issue of planning and building, as well as all other planning bodies. The Firm also represents clients in civil and administrative courts, including the Supreme Court.
Shoob & Co. has obtained many landmark rulings in the real estate sector, including:
• Hamami vs. the Rishon Le’Zion Local Committee – the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that, as part of a compensation claim relating to an approved urban development plan that harms a landowner – 40% of the compensation cannot be deducted, as was customary up to ruling date. This ruling caused an upheaval in the field of urban development compensation claims. The ruling was reaffirmed within the framework of an additional hearing before five justices at the Supreme Court.
• Israel Fruit Distribution Co. vs. Kfar Saba Local Council – a compensation case where the court defined for the first time what makes up “reasonable” compensation of landowners.
• Horowitz vs. Ra’anana Local Council – the Firm represented Horowitz before the Supreme Court in what is today the guiding ruling defining “reasonable” damage that does not require compensation.
• Har vs. Netanya Local Council – handed down by the Supreme Court – compensation was granted in connection with land expropriation, the development of which was held up for years by various development plans, and the compensation was settled for the first time by considering the various plans as one plan for calculating the damages.
• Bank Massad vs. the State of Israel – the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that landowners whose land was expropriated were entitled to receive compensation for loss of freehold rent until the State granted compensation.
• Isco Buildings vs. the State of Israel – the Supreme Court ruled that the Israel Lands Administration had no entitlement to a fee when transferring building rights between various plots.
• Moshe Shoob vs. B’nei Brak Local Planning and Construction Committee – a decision handed down by the Regional Appeal Committee under which terms and conditions under Articles 77 and 78, published by the B’nei Brak Local Planning and Construction Committee, conditioning TAMA 38 building permits on the allocation of public areas on the ground floor of apartment buildings.
• Yitzchak ben Artzi and 82 others vs. the State of Israel – a process by which the holding, by the State, of land owned by the petitioners under orders issued under Regulation 125 of the Defense Regulation (Emergency), 1945.
• Ya’acov Heitner Relief Endowment Fund vs. the Minister of Finance et al. – the Supreme Court ruled that appropriation compensation should be assessed vis-à-vis “lost lease fees” under conceptual rental fees derived from the varying value of land, etc.
• Divon vs. Petah Tikva Local Committee – the Supreme Court ruled on an exemption vis-à-vis a housing unit for landowners that live on the land and are involved in the construction thereon.
• The Tel Aviv District Court (Planning and Construction) vs. Nof Yam Blue and White Ltd. – The Supreme Court held that the exceptional use of a permit does not constitute an independent tax event in respect of which a betterment levy should be levied, but an exercise of rights only, such that if there is any previous realization by sale, under which the betterment levy was paid, it will not be possible to charge any additional betterment levy.
CofaceBdi Combined risk index summary for October 2017 Deterioration in the Combined risk index of Israel’s economy * About 13.25% of the companies were rated in high and dangerous risk levels * Heading the weak and dangerous branches: Coffee shops and Transport services * Heading the strongest and secure branches: Pharmaceutical and cosmetics industry and […]
ranking of leading urban renovation companies in Israel CofaceBdi 2017 To continue reading the article in Hebrew
Which company Israelis think it is best to work for? Every year, as in the last 13 years, we perform the employees survey among tens of thousands of employees in Israel with the aim to analyze their satisfaction from their workplace and in parallel to examine what is important to the Israeli worker about his […]