ISRAEL Law and Practice Contributed by: Talya Solomon, Iris Achmon, Ekaterina Yaremchuk and Niva Orion, Herzog Fox & Neeman
ECL itself), one of the block exemptions enacted by the Commissioner, or if the parties obtained an approval granted by the Competition Tribunal or a specific exemption granted by the Com - missioner. For example, joint ventures, mutual purchases or joint research and development may all fall out - side the scope of the “restrictive arrangement” definition. If they do fall within it, the above may enter under the provision of a specific block exemption, such as a block exemption for joint venture or the general block exemption for verti - cal arrangements. Some sectors and industries have unique exemptions, such as farmers, marine transpor - tation and defence industries that have unique statutory exemptions or block exemptions spe - cifically tailored to the needs and characteristics of the industries, and may sometimes include elements of price fixing, market sharing or quo - tas. 1.5 Limitation Periods The basic limitation period for private civil claims is seven years. The period generally commences on the day when the claim first arose. The claim arises on the day when the relevant act or omission occurred; for an ongoing act or omission, it arises on the day it ceased. When the claim is based on damage caused by an act or omission, this will be the later of: • the day the damage occurred; or • the day it first became known, but no more than ten years from its occurrence. An exception exists where the facts constituting the cause of action were hidden from the plain - tiff for reasons unconnected with them, and the
plaintiff was unable to prevent them, even by exercising reasonable caution. In such a case, the limitation period will begin on the date the plaintiff became aware of these facts. According to the case law of the Supreme Court, the determinative date for Section 8 of the Limi - tation Law is the date on which there was “hint” or “suspicion” upon which the plaintiff, taking reasonable measures, could follow and discover The limits on personal jurisdiction over alleged cartel participants vary between criminal and civil proceedings. In criminal cases, the basic rule is that the Israeli Panel Law 1977 (the “Penal Law” ) (hence also criminal offences set forth in other laws such as the ECL) shall apply to all “domestic offences” , meaning an offence that the entirety or part thereof was committed within Israeli territory. In administrative cases, the Commissioner has been known to apply the “effects doctrine” , which means that for the Commissioner to have jurisdiction over a cartel, suffice that it might have had an effect in Israeli markets. the cause of action. 1.6 Jurisdiction In civil cases, on the substantive level, the courts have shown a tendency to apply the effects doctrine, though no Supreme Court ruling has been rendered in this regard. On the procedural level, the acquisition of jurisdiction over a foreign defendant is conditional upon the satisfaction of three cumulative conditions. • The existence of a cause of service pursu - ant to the alternative categories is provided under Regulation 166 of the Regulations of Civil Procedure 2018. The regulations list 11
163 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook