The Hadera Magistrates Court has thrown out a claim by the Palestine International Bank against an Israeli Arab on the grounds that the Palestinian Authority courts were the appropriate forum in which the case should be heard.
The "natural forum" for hearing a claim is the country with the strongest connection to the dispute. When ruling on the appropriate jurisdiction for claim, the court takes a two types of considerations into account - convenience, which covers matters such ease of the access by all parties to evidence, the ability to subpoena witnesses and recover any related costs, the difficulty, if any, in enforcing the judgment: and significant considerations relating to the rational expectations of the parties and the impact that the manner of judicial proceedings could have on the claim. With the world now one global village, considerations of convenience now have less weight, especially given the progress of technology.
In this case, ruled Hadera Magistrates Court Judge Hadasa Asif, the sole connection with Israel was the fact that the respondent is an Israeli citizen. Most of the significant aspects of the case remain exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Palestinian courts: the bank is located in Ramallah; the agreements were drafted in Arabic and signed there, and the claimant was given the credit line in Palestinian-controlled territory. "These facts show that the parties had reasonable expectations that the deal, with it all entailed, including any litigation hearings, would be conducted in the Palestinian Authority," ruled Judge Asif.
Published by Globes [online], Israel business news - www.globes-online.com - on December 11, 2008
© Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd. 2008