Organization for a New Discourse v. Minister of National Infrastructure
Israel Supreme Court
HCJ 244/00, 56(6) PD 25 (2002)

- Written by Whitney Waldenberg, JD
Facts
The Israel Lands Administration leased land to agricultural communities, known as kibbutzim and moshavim. The land was, by law, designated for agricultural use, with the lessees obligated to work the land. However, the changing demographics of Israel, including an influx of immigrants from the former Soviet Union, prompted different needs for this land. The Lands Council, a decision-making authority established by the Lands Administration, issued Decision 1, declaring that if the function of the land needed to be converted from agricultural use to another type of use, such as housing, then the government could incentivize a current lessee to agree to the conversion by compensating the lessee upon return of the land to the Lands Administration. After Decision 1 was issued, the Lands Council made several decisions regarding the changing use of the land and the compensation due to the lessee. The Organization for a New Discourse (plaintiff) sued the minister of national infrastructure (defendant), challenging the implementation of two decisions of the Lands Council regarding the changing use of land. Decision 727 was aimed at creating a large inventory of land that would be available for residential development, and it directed that the current agricultural lessees of certain land would be compensated for the fair market value of the land for its intended residential development, not its current agricultural use. The result was that lessees of land in highly desirable areas were to be compensated far more than lessees in less desirable rural areas. Decision 717 allowed the agricultural lessees to develop industrial areas on the plots of land that they leased, and it pegged the lease payments between 16 to 41 percent of the property value, depending on the region where the property was located. The result was that certain lessees were given larger discounts on rent than others. Decision 717 also permitted the agricultural lessee to partner with private companies in the industrial development. The Organization for a New Discourse challenged both decisions as unreasonable and inequitable.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Or, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.