Skip to main content

Public vs. Private Rights

Court Rules on Nahal Haasi Access Dispute

Tel Aviv District Court rejects class action lawsuit against Kibbutz Nir David, upholding state-designed access plan while leaving key question about kibbutz gate closure unresolved

Haasi River

A Tel Aviv District Court judge has dismissed a request to certify a class action lawsuit against Kibbutz Nir David concerning public access to Nahal Haasi, a natural stream running through the kibbutz grounds. In her Thursday ruling, Judge Idit Barkowitz acknowledged that the public holds access rights to the natural resource, but determined that a class action suit is neither an efficient nor fair mechanism for resolving this complex dispute.

The decision emphasized the need to balance the public's right to reach the stream against the rights of kibbutz members whose homes are located along its banks. The court also recognized the kibbutz's substantial investment—estimated at tens of millions of shekels—in rehabilitating, cleaning, and maintaining the stream and its surroundings over many years.

Judge Barkowitz characterized the dispute as a "multi-faceted problem" without simple solutions, stressing that "a judge is not a planning institution." She clarified that the state, not the courts, must establish the practical conditions that would enable public access while protecting residents' privacy, safety, and daily routines.

The court endorsed the "Green Beach" framework developed by the state during a previous administrative petition as providing an appropriate, fair, and reasonable solution. This plan allows the public to enter the stream via a beach at its western edge, outside the residential area, and provides controlled access to the southern bank. However, it does not permit unrestricted entry to the northern bank adjacent to kibbutz homes.

The ruling underscored that Nahal Haasi is a public resource and that the kibbutz's land rights do not grant it ownership of the water source or absolute authority to prevent public access. Nevertheless, the court determined that the public's rights to the stream do not necessarily entitle unlimited entry through the kibbutz's main gate.

Judge Barkowitz also ruled that closing the kibbutz gate does not constitute prohibited discrimination for purposes of certifying a class action. She noted that the kibbutz operates as a cooperative association under private law and is not defined as a business, public service provider, or local authority.

The request for compensation to class members was likewise rejected. The court found no basis for requiring the kibbutz to pay damages for the period before access arrangements were formalized, partly because the state had not previously developed an appropriate framework.

While dismissing the lawsuit, the judge clarified that her decision does not resolve the fundamental question of whether the kibbutz has authority to close its gates. According to her ruling, that question remains open for future determination.

Ready for more?

Join our newsletter to receive updates on new articles and exclusive content.

We respect your privacy and will never share your information.

Enjoyed this article?

Yes (17)
No (1)
Follow Us:

Unmissable content


Loading comments...

Also of Interest