Skip to main content
fbc logo
  • facebook-social
  • linkedin-social
  • Home
  • About
  • Practices
  • Practices
      • Arbitration & Mediation
      • Aviation & Maritime
      • Banking & Finance
      • Blockchain and Cryptocurrency
      • Capital Markets
      • Class Actions & Derivative Suits
      • Commercial
      • Competition & Antitrust
      • Cybersecurity, IT & Data Protection
      • East Asia Desk
      • Environmental
      • Family & Inheritance Law
      • Financial Regulation
      • FinTech
      • French Desk
      • Global Talent Mobility & Relocation
      • Hi-Tech, Technology & Venture Capital
      • Hotels & Tourism
      • Insolvency & Restructuring
      • Intellectual Property
      • Investment Funds
      • Labor & Employment
      • Life Sciences & Healthcare
      • Liquidation & Receivership
      • Litigation
      • Mergers & Acquisitions
      • Philanthropy
      • Planning & Zoning
      • Private Asset Management
      • Private Equity
      • Project Finance & Energy
      • Real Estate
      • Regulatory
      • Sports Law
      • Tax
      • Tax - Municipal Tax
      • Tech Litigation
      • Telecom & Media
      • Trade Associations
      • White Collar
  • Team
  • News
  • Community
  • Alumni
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • FBC Online
  • Accessibility
  • Subscribe

Legal Update: Class Actions & Derivative Suits - March 2017

By Gil Orion, Dr. & Tal Wiesengrun | Mar 2017 | Legal Update

Israeli Jurisdiction over Foreign Cartelists 

Recently, an Israeli District Court addressed the jurisdiction of Israeli courts over foreign companies accused of being part of a prohibited cartel that acted outside of Israel but had an impact on market prices – and caused damages to consumers in Israel. The Court held that if the cartel arrangement was effected outside of Israel, and the cartelists took no actions to implement the cartel in Israel, Israeli courts have no jurisdiction over the cartelists.

The issue arose in a class action proceeding brought against foreign defendants alleged to have participated in a cartel that coordinated the prices of LCD panels. The plaintiffs claimed that the impact of the cartel was also felt in the Israeli market where products that included the panels were sold.

The District Court Registrar granted the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to serve the non-Israeli respondents, and the defendants appealed to the District Court.

Since the defendants were non-Israeli, the question before the Court of whether service of process abroad should be allowed turned on whether an act or omission by the defendants took place within the State of Israel, which would be a condition for an Israeli court to have jurisdiction over the non-Israeli defendants.

The plaintiffs’ principal argument was that while the defendants did not carry out any act with the State – neither coordination of prices nor sale of panels or of end-products – their end-products were sold in Israel by third parties; hence, the plaintiffs argued, it is possible to attribute to the defendants the “act” of the third parties that was carried out in the State. Moreover, the plaintiffs claimed that the alleged cartel was a restrictive arrangement that influenced the Israeli market and thus was an “act” carried out in Israel.

On December 29, 2016, the District Court cancelled the leave for service that the Registrar had granted against the defendants. The Court held that it was not possible to attribute to them any act or omission that took place within the State of Israel.

The Court established that the cartelists did not sell products in Israel, as none of the third parties that sold the companies’ endproducts in Israel were connected in any way to the defendants, whether as their representatives, agents or otherwise.

Furthermore, the Court adopted the position of the DirectorGeneral of the Israeli Antitrust Authority, to the effect that a foreign company that does not have a legal presence in Israel is deemed to act in Israel only if a clear connection exists between the company’s conduct outside Israel and its impact in the local market. Where a restrictive arrangement is formed outside Israel and is not directed “entirely” to the Israeli market, and the foreign participants did not take an active role in implementing the arrangement in Israel, then there will not be a sufficient connection to the Israeli market to support a jurisdictional claim against the foreign parties.

In the matter at hand, the defendants did not direct the alleged cartel “entirely” to the Israeli market, but rather, as the court found, directed the cartel to markets around the world; in practice, the cartelists did not sell the alleged cartelized products – or carry out cartelistic activity – in Israel, and thus no act or omission was carried out in Israel.

This decision provides some measure of comfort for companies alleged to have engaged in cartelistic practices outside Israel, but not in specific cartelistic activities in Israel. While cases such as this are inevitably very fact-sensitive, this decision indicates that in appropriate circumstances, companies in the position of the defendants may not be drawn into the Israeli jurisdictional net.

[Case no. 57451-03-16 Hatzlacha v. AU Optronic Corporation and others (Published in the Nevo Law Repository, December 29, 2016)]

 

For further information please feel free to contact the Author of this update:

Adv. Dr. Gil Orion          gorion@fbclawyers.com    +972.3.694.4142

Adv. Tal  Wiesengrun    talw@fbclawyers.com        +972.3.694.1320

Search by

General Search

Practice Area

  • Arbitration & Mediation
  • Aviation & Maritime
  • Banking & Finance
  • Blockchain and Cryptocurrency
  • Capital Markets
  • Class Actions & Derivative Suits
  • Commercial
  • Competition & Antitrust
  • Cybersecurity, IT & Data Protection
  • East Asia Desk
  • Environmental
  • Family & Inheritance Law
  • Financial Regulation
  • FinTech
  • French Desk
  • Global Talent Mobility & Relocation
  • Hi-Tech, Technology & Venture Capital
  • Hotels & Tourism
  • Insolvency & Restructuring
  • Intellectual Property
  • Investment Funds
  • Labor & Employment
  • Life Sciences & Healthcare
  • Liquidation & Receivership
  • Litigation
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Philanthropy
  • Planning & Zoning
  • Private Asset Management
  • Private Equity
  • Project Finance & Energy
  • Real Estate
  • Regulatory
  • Sports Law
  • Tax
  • Tax - Municipal Tax
  • Tech Litigation
  • Telecom & Media
  • Trade Associations
  • White Collar

Attorney

Date

  • Last Month
  • Last Six Months
  • Last Year

Publication Type

  • Transaction
  • Publication
  • Legal Update
  • Firm News
Clear Search
Israel Law Firm of the year by IFLR 1000 for 2020

Recent News & Publications

מעו”דכן תכנון ובניה – מאי 2025

אנו שמחים להציג בפניכם גיליון נוסף של מעו"דכן תכנון ובניה ובו עדכוני חקיקה, פסיקה והחלטות ועדת ערר מהעת האחרונה. ביום 24.4.2025 נכנסו לתוקף...

Yaniv Gorelik | May 2025

מעו”דכן יחסי עבודה – פרסום צו הרחבה להסכם קיבוצי בענף ההסעדה המוסדית – מאי 2025

פרסום צו הרחבה להסכם קיבוצי בענף ההסעדה המוסדית  לקוחות יקרים, ברצוננו לעדכן אתכם בדבר פרסום צו הרחבה להסכם הקיבוצי בשירותי ההסעדה המוסדית...

Moran Friedman & Hilla Sachs & Fatima Mahmoud & Hadar Kohen & Keren Berger | May 2025

מעו”דכן יחסי עבודה – העסקת עובדים ביום הזיכרון וביום העצמאות – אפריל 2025

אנחנו מבקשים להזכירכם כי יום הזיכרון לחללי מערכות ישראל ונפגעי פעולות האיבה יחול השנה ביום רביעי, 30.04.2025. בהתאם לחוק יום הזיכרון לחללי ...

Moran Friedman & Hilla Sachs & Hadar Kohen & Fatima Mahmoud & Keren Berger | Apr 2025
View all News >>
Practice Areas
    • Arbitration & Mediation
    • Aviation & Maritime
    • Banking & Finance
    • Blockchain and Cryptocurrency
    • Capital Markets
    • Class Actions & Derivative Suits
    • Commercial
    • Competition & Antitrust
    • Cybersecurity, IT & Data Protection
    • East Asia Desk
    • Environmental
    • Family & Inheritance Law
    • Financial Regulation
    • FinTech
    • French Desk
    • Global Talent Mobility & Relocation
    • Hi-Tech, Technology & Venture Capital
    • Hotels & Tourism
    • Insolvency & Restructuring
    • Intellectual Property
    • Investment Funds
    • Labor & Employment
    • Life Sciences & Healthcare
    • Liquidation & Receivership
    • Litigation
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • Philanthropy
    • Planning & Zoning
    • Private Asset Management
    • Private Equity
    • Project Finance & Energy
    • Real Estate
    • Regulatory
    • Sports Law
    • Tax
    • Tax - Municipal Tax
    • Tech Litigation
    • Telecom & Media
    • Trade Associations
    • White Collar
Attorneys by Practice
    • Arbitration & Mediation
    • Aviation & Maritime
    • Banking & Finance
    • Blockchain and Cryptocurrency
    • Capital Markets
    • Class Actions & Derivative Suits
    • Commercial
    • Competition & Antitrust
    • Cybersecurity, IT & Data Protection
    • East Asia Desk
    • Environmental
    • Family & Inheritance Law
    • Financial Regulation
    • FinTech
    • French Desk
    • Global Talent Mobility & Relocation
    • Hi-Tech, Technology & Venture Capital
    • Hotels & Tourism
    • Insolvency & Restructuring
    • Intellectual Property
    • Investment Funds
    • Labor & Employment
    • Life Sciences & Healthcare
    • Liquidation & Receivership
    • Litigation
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • Philanthropy
    • Planning & Zoning
    • Private Asset Management
    • Private Equity
    • Project Finance & Energy
    • Real Estate
    • Regulatory
    • Sports Law
    • Tax
    • Tax - Municipal Tax
    • Tech Litigation
    • Telecom & Media
    • Trade Associations
    • White Collar
Team Member by Name
All Rights Reserved, FBC&Co
Photography by Ofir Abe | Designed By Hastudeö | Developed By Beaverglobal