Evicting an intruder from an apartment or from real estate or property can be very complex tasks, especially if you are not familiar with the instructions. Real Estate LawForcibly evicting a person who has invaded real estate or any property may lead to a violation of the law. By the referrer, and this may lead to a particularly outrageous situation, in which the intruder will file a lawsuit against the owner of the clearing, and even win it and receive financial compensation.
Before we talk about evicting an intruder using reasonable force or through a lawsuit to evict an intruder, it is important to understand who an intruder is and what the problem is with the act of invasion.
Who is an intruder?
An intruder is a person who enters and illegally takes control of an apartment or property or real estate. Not only was the intruder not given permission to enter the area, but he also refuses to vacate the area, and sometimes conditions his consent to vacate the area in exchange for a large financial payment.
ישנם פולשים "מקצועיים" אשר יודעים שהליך פינוי פולש הוא הליך משפטי לא מהיר ובעיקר יקר, ולכן סוחטים, כך ממש, את בעל הנכס על מנת שישלם לפולש בתמורה לעזיבתו את הנכס או הדירה או המקרקעין.
There are even more sophisticated invaders who seek out areas designated for improvement and construction and, just before work begins, invade the area and refuse to vacate. In these cases, the developer may lose millions of shekels if the work does not begin.
Not only do private individuals or companies deal with invaders, but also the state, which is forced to deal with invasion of state lands.
Pay attention – A person who has stopped paying rent for an apartment or property but refuses to vacate cannot be treated in the same way as a squatter (read the Supreme Court ruling on this matter mentioned at the end of the article). A lawsuit for eviction of a tenant should be filed against such a person.
What problems arise due to invasion?
A person who invades an apartment or property or real estate creates many problems for the owner of the land, such as:
- The owner cannot use the property or area as he wishes.
- The intruder may vandalize the apartment or property or cause other damage.
- The owner of the property/real estate cannot rent or sell the property or real estate.
- The act of encroachment, in itself, may cause a reduction in the price of the property or land.
- Eviction of an intruder is not a simple task that involves legal proceedings, and therefore the property owner will inevitably have to hire a lawyer and pay him. Fees A not insignificant amount in order to file a lawsuit to evict an intruder.
- The previous problem leads to another problem - the property owner will have to spend quite a bit of time evicting the intruder.
What can be done to evict an intruder?
In order to evict an intruder, one must first familiarize oneself with Section 18 of the Land Law, which states:
(a) The lawful possessor of land may use reasonable force to prevent trespassing or unlawful denial of control over it.
(b) If a person unlawfully seizes the land, the lawful possessor thereof may, within thirty days from the date of seizure, use reasonable force to remove him from it.
That is, a person may use reasonable force to prevent the act of invasion or encroachment.
In order to evict an intruder, you must first understand how long he has actually been in the apartment or property or real estate.
Evacuation of an intruder found in the area within 30 days from the date of invasion
Section 18(b) of the Land Law allows the landowner to use reasonable force to evict the intruder within the first 30 days.
In order for reasonable force to be used, the following conditions must be met:
- The invader took control of the land.
- The takeover was carried out illegally.
- 30 days have not yet passed since the invader entered the area.
What is reasonable force?
Reasonable force or the exercise of force to a reasonable extent are not defined in the Land Law and in practice each case is examined on its merits as soon as the case reaches court within the framework of the Civil lawsuit.
יחד עם זאת, ניתן לומר ללא קושי שלירות בפולש או "לפוצץ" אותו במכות לא תחשב להפעלת כוח סביר.
On the other hand, removing the intruder's belongings from the premises within the first 30 days and changing the locks may be accepted as reasonable force.
Eviction of an intruder found on the premises after 30 days from the date of the invasion – a claim to evict an intruder
Eviction of an intruder after 30 days have passed from the date of the invasion becomes a much more complex task. In these cases, it is no longer possible to use reasonable force, but rather a lawsuit must be filed to evict the intruder, which is effectively a lawsuit to remove the occupant.
Within the framework of that claim, one should not be satisfied solely with the relief of eviction, but one can also demand financial compensation for the damages caused to the owner of the land, apartment or property.
If the invader is evicted at this stage using reasonable force, he may file a lawsuit against the evictor, claiming that the evictor (usually the owner of the land or someone on his behalf) acted unlawfully. There is a high probability that in this situation the invader will even be entitled to some financial compensation.
Can I contact the police to evict an intruder?
In theory, it is indeed possible to contact the Israel Police and ask for their assistance in dealing with an intruder in an apartment, land, or property when 30 days have not yet passed since the invasion. In practice, the Israel Police may not always be able (or willing) to assist, especially if the intruder claims that he has the right to remain on the property and tries to convince the police that this is a civil dispute. In these situations, the Israel Police will refer the owner of the property to court.
The Israel Police will immediately refer the landowner to court if it turns out that the intruder has been on the land for more than 30 days.
עמדת המשטרה נובעת מפסיקות בית המשפט העליון, לדוגמה במסגרת בג"צ 1750/22 עיד יוסף אבו טאעה נ' משטרת ישראל ואח' (פסק דין מיום 12.4.2022), אשר קובע, בין היתר כך:
The rule is that in cases where assistance is requested from the Israel Police in removing an intruder, before they feel the need for help from the person requesting it It must examine the fulfillment of the conditions set forth in Section 18(b) of the Land Law. In particular, to the extent that there is a lack of clarity regarding the identity of the owner of the land prior to the alleged invasion, the police may not intervene in the matter. (בג"ץ 5602/21 סיאם נ' משטרת ישראל, פסקה 7 (27.10.2021) (להלן: עניין סיאם); בג"ץ 136/21 עמליה אבישר נ' נתיבי ישראל – החברה הלאומית לתשתיות, פסקה 6 (9.2.2021); בג"ץ 8950/17 אבו אלרוב נ' משטרת ישראל, פסקה 6 (2.9.2018)).
As appears from the petition and the respondents' responses, at this time there is uncertainty regarding the question of rights and possession of the apartment prior to the alleged invasion. I did not find that the temporary restraining order was sufficient to substantiate the petitioner's claims on the question of possession, inter alia because the said order was issued 5 years after the alleged sale transaction (see and cf.: Siam case, paragraph 8). In these circumstances, the police position is that it should not exercise its authority under section 18(b) of the Land Law and that The civil dispute must be resolved in the competent court, and does not reveal grounds for intervention.
Is it possible to evict a tenant who has violated a contract by reasonable force?
In situations where a tenant Violates the rental agreementIf a tenant stops paying rent and does not vacate the property, the owner of the apartment or property may consider him an intruder and use reasonable force against him. This would be a mistake and the owner of the apartment or property may pay dearly for it.
בעניין זה עמדת בית המשפט העליון מאוד ברורה – בעל הדירה או הנכס אינו יכול להפעיל כוח סביר כנגד השוכר הסורר. בית המשפט העליון קבע כך (רע"א 1798/16 עדל מוחמד חאפז אבו אלדבעאת ואח' נ' נג'אתי אלג'עברי, verdict From March 14, 2017):
In passing, I will note, although such a claim was not raised in our case, that the fact that the parties before us are a lessor (currently his successors) and a tenant does not affect the possibility of a claim under Section 19 of the Land Law as stated. Indeed, the fact that the opposing parties are a landlord and a tenant was given importance in the ruling regarding the possibility of using force to a reasonable extent under Section 18(b) of the Land Law against someone who illegally seized the land and removed it from the hands of the lawful possessor. In this regard, it was determined that the landlord is not permitted to use force against the tenant after the end of the lease period or upon breach of the agreement, and his remedy is only to apply to a competent judicial body. (בג"ץ 477/81 בן ישראל נ' המפקח הכללי של המשטרה, פ"ד לו(4) 349, 352 (1982); רע"א 5058/99 כספי נ' דויטש, פ"ד נה(4) 529, 538 (2001)).
But this does not mean that a landlord is not entitled to file a claim under Section 19 against a tenant. The aforementioned restriction concerning Section 18(b) originates from a legal policy that seeks to reduce the preference for the use of force over recourse to judicial bodies, even though it is not required by the wording of the section (Deutsch, at p. 379). This reason is not required for the purpose of filing a claim under Section 19 of the Land Law, since the reasons underlying the protection of the use and possession of land, even if unlawful, are primarily the maintenance of public order and the prevention of the use of force as a means of resolving disputes. (Okashi's case, at p. 303; for a different approach, see Weissman, at pp. 75-76).
In conclusion
An intruder on a property, apartment, or property may cause the owner of that property a great deal of damage. The damage can be expressed in loss of income, a decrease in the value of the property or property, financial expenses to evict the intruder, and, no less important, a great deal of waste and expense to deal with the intruder.
The Land Law allows the use of reasonable force against an intruder. In these cases, the person who can use reasonable force is the landowner or another person on his behalf, only if the invasion is indeed unauthorized, and only if 30 days have not yet passed since the invasion.
In the event that the intruder is on the land, apartment, or property for more than 30 days, it is necessary to file a lawsuit to evict the intruder, which is a lawsuit to remove the occupant.
In some cases, the Israel Police can assist in evicting the intruder.
Frequently asked questions about evicting an intruder
-
Is it possible to use force when evicting an intruder?
When evicting an intruder before 30 days have passed since the invasion, reasonable force may be used. Reasonable force does not mean that the intruder can be beaten, but rather that the locks can be changed, his belongings removed, and the property guarded to prevent his return.
The issue of using reasonable force will be examined in each case on its merits. -
Is eviction of an intruder possible if more than 30 days have passed since the date of the invasion?
Eviction of an intruder is also possible in this case, but this will require filing a lawsuit in court.
-
Is it possible to seek assistance from the Israel Police to evict an intruder?
The Israel Police may assist with evicting an intruder only if 30 days have not passed since the date of the invasion. In most cases, the Israel Police will refer the property/landowner to legal proceedings.
-
Apart from evicting the intruder, can he be sued for the damages he caused?
yes.
