Background
The appellant appealed as of right from a Jerusalem District Court judgment dismissing his tort action against the Israel Police and the State. The tort action followed his acquittal in an earlier criminal proceeding. The District Court dismissed the action without awarding costs.
He sought exemption from both the appellate filing fee and the obligation to deposit security for costs, or alternatively a substantial reduction of the security. He asserted that he was unemployed, depended on a disability allowance, owned no assets, had encumbered or overdrawn bank accounts, and could not obtain funds from people close to him. The respondents opposed exemption from security, arguing that the appeal had poor prospects, but left the fee issue to the Court’s discretion.
The appellant also requested permission to reply to the respondents’ submission. Registrar Moran Yahav denied that request because the Civil Procedure Regulations do not confer a right to file such a reply and the case presented no exceptional reason to depart from the ordinary procedure.
The Court’s Holding
The Registrar explained that exemption from fees and security requires both a complete, current evidentiary showing of financial inability and sufficient prospects of success. Exemption from a filing fee requires an arguable cause, while exemption from security requires a real prospect of success. An applicant must also show an inability to raise the security with assistance from close associates.
The appellant’s evidence was incomplete: he did not adequately itemize his expenses, document attempts to obtain help from those close to him, provide six months of bank statements or credit-card records, or explain how he had paid the fee in the District Court. Nevertheless, his affidavit and attachments contained some indications of financial difficulty. Considering those indications, the appeal’s status as an appeal as of right, and the disparity between the parties—without expressing any view on the appeal’s merits—the Registrar waived the filing fee and reduced the security deposit to NIS 3,500.
The security must be deposited by August 4, 2026, failing which the appeal may be dismissed without a further decision. The Registrar declined to award the respondents costs because the Supreme Court ordinarily does not award costs on applications for exemption from fees and security, and the circumstances did not warrant a departure from that practice.
Key Takeaways
- Financial hardship must ordinarily be established through complete, current documentation, including expenses, account records, and documented efforts to obtain assistance from close associates.
- An incomplete evidentiary showing may still support partial relief where the record indicates genuine hardship and other circumstances favor accommodation.
- The ruling addressed only appellate fees and security for costs; it expressed no view on the merits of the underlying tort appeal.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Israeli Supreme Court’s flexible but evidence-focused approach to access-to-justice applications. Even though the appellant failed to provide all required financial documentation, the Registrar balanced the available evidence of hardship against the appeal’s procedural status and the parties’ unequal resources.
It also underscores the distinction between waiving a filing fee and waiving security for costs: the Court granted full relief from the former but preserved protection for the respondents through a reduced deposit.