Background
Guy Lakan began doctoral studies at Hebrew University in 2020 and worked for the Capital Market, Insurance and Savings Authority from 2019 through 2023. The Authority approved his request to use data from its databases for academic research in June 2021, subject to stated conditions. It later took the position that the approval applied only during his employment and that he could not use certain data in his research.
Lakan challenged that position in the Jerusalem District Court sitting as the Court for Administrative Affairs. A November 2025 judgment established a framework for the parties, which the Ministry appealed in Administrative Appeal 45976-01-26. After a second petition concerning implementation of that framework, the District Court issued another judgment requiring a new response from the Ministry under guidelines set out in both judgments, prescribing further procedures, and awarding NIS 47,200 in costs for the two petitions. The Ministry filed the present appeal and asked the Supreme Court to hear both appeals together and advance the hearing date for the first appeal.
The Court’s Holding
Registrar Moran Yahav found that the two appeals share a common factual foundation because the second proceeding concerns implementation of the framework established in the first. Hebrew University did not oppose coordinated hearings, and Lakan gave qualified consent conditioned on the scheduling of a preliminary hearing. The registrar ordered that, unless Lakan filed an objection by August 12, 2026, both appeals would be heard on the same date before the same panel.
The registrar declined to advance the existing hearing date immediately because of the Court’s calendar constraints and workload. She nevertheless directed the scheduling office to examine whether an earlier date could become available through an opening in the calendar and, if so, to schedule both appeals together before the same panel. The decision did not resolve the merits of either appeal or determine whether Lakan may use or publish the disputed data.
Key Takeaways
- Related administrative appeals arising from an original judgment and its implementation may be coordinated when they share the same factual and legal foundation.
- The two appeals will be heard together before the same panel unless Lakan objects by August 12, 2026.
- The Court did not grant immediate expedition, but instructed its scheduling office to consider an earlier hearing if a calendar opening becomes available.
Why It Matters
The ruling is procedural rather than a merits decision. It aligns appellate review of the original administrative framework with review of the later judgment implementing that framework, reducing the risk of inconsistent rulings.
Although the Ministry argued that publication of Lakan’s research before appellate resolution could irreversibly harm public privacy and other public interests, the registrar made no finding on those assertions. Their substantive significance remains for the panel hearing the appeals.