Proposal for Halachic Regulations Regarding Evacuation and Reconstruction
Question
Introduction to a practical halachic question:
In the State of Israel, building rights are determined only according to the lawful building permit and the registration in the Tabu land registry.
The courts have ruled in many judgments
that it is forbidden to support a phenomenon in which an apartment owner with a building extension constructed without a building permit receives any kind of monetary reward and/or benefit of monetary value,
such as a larger apartment in an urban renewal project, by virtue of the illegal building extension,
and moreover at the expense of neighboring apartment owners who kept the law, or at the expense of the developer-contractor of the evacuation-reconstruction project.
From a property-law perspective, building a room on common property, without a building permit from the municipality and without the neighbors’ consent, constitutes an encroachment upon the common property.
In an evacuation-reconstruction project, this common property belongs to everyone,
and therefore the building rights calculated on the basis of its area belong to all the apartment owners in the area/building, as recorded in law and in the Tabu.
In addition,
the Real Estate Appraisers Council established Standard 21, which instructs appraisers how to calculate the consideration and the economic feasibility.
According to this standard, the area of the new apartment is calculated according to the area of the old apartment that received a building permit.
Any area in the old apartment that was built without a building permit is not counted for the purpose of calculating the area of the new apartment, nor is it counted for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
However,
in practice, the attorney for the apartment owners appoints an independent appraiser, funded by the developer, to measure each apartment and prepare a scoring table that determines what each apartment owner will receive.
Then the building deviations are divided into one of the following 4 categories:
1] The deviation is not counted. The apartment owner receives consideration like a neighbor who owns an identical apartment without a building deviation. This is the common approach regarding new building deviations and/or blatant construction encroachments.
2] Retroactive building permit. If, according to state law, the deviation can be legalized retroactively, such as enclosing a balcony for which there are unused building rights,
then the developer may agree to legalize it at his own expense or at the apartment owner’s expense before the new building permit. After legalization, the area becomes legal and is counted in calculating the consideration.
3] Statute of limitations. If the deviation is sufficiently old, and therefore there is some limitation period regarding enforcement under state law,
then the developer may agree to legalize it at his own expense or at the apartment owner’s expense before the new building permit. After legalization, the area becomes legal and is counted in calculating the consideration.
4] Preventing delay. In rare cases, in order to secure the apartment owner’s consent and prevent costly legal proceedings, it is agreed to give him partial compensation amounting to tens of percent of the value of a regular square meter.
[Response: an attorney specializing in evacuation-reconstruction. Date: 22/01/2026.]
And it appears that there are situations in which, due to a large number of building extensions without building permits in the same area/street,
the attorney for the apartment owners in the area/street obtains consent to an evacuation-reconstruction contract that does not distinguish between these 4 types of building deviations.
For example, a leading law firm working on behalf of apartment owners on a certain street obtained the consent of evacuation-reconstruction developers to the following 2 clauses:
"Clause 44: Approval of building deviations, namely areas built without a lawful building permit, except with regard to balcony areas, to which the provisions of Clause 45 below shall apply,
provided that the said building deviations actually exist as of: 30/12/2025. [This is a date that had passed at the time the contract was presented.]
Regarding building coefficients due to uses, the cut-off date shall be 30/12/2026. [This is a date that had not yet passed at the time the contract was presented.]
Clause 45: Approval of building deviations built as balcony areas, namely balcony areas built without a lawful building permit,
provided that the said building deviations actually exist as of 30/12/2025. [This is a date that had passed at the time the contract was presented.]
Regarding building coefficients due to uses, the cut-off date shall be 30/12/2026. [This is a date that had not yet passed at the time the contract was presented.]"
[From: the table of responses by the evacuation-reconstruction developers to a questionnaire submitted by the attorneys for the apartment owners.
The response table was published to the apartment owners on: 16/06/2026.]
And in this table there is no reference at all to dividing the building deviations into one of the 4 types listed above.
Therefore, it appears that there is a line of reasoning that it is permissible to count all types of building deviations for the purpose of calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for the purpose of calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
If an apartment owner has a building extension without any lawful building permit from the municipality,
there is a line of reasoning that it is illogical to count that area for the purpose of calculating the area and/or the additional area of the new apartment that each apartment owner will receive at the end of the evacuation-reconstruction project.
And even if he did receive a lawful building permit from the municipality,
there is a line of reasoning that it is illogical to count that area for the purpose of calculating the area and/or the additional area of the new apartment that each apartment owner will receive at the end of the evacuation-reconstruction project,
if, when he asked the neighbors not to object to the building permit, it was by means of one or more of these 3 arguments:
1] A new reinforced security room, a mamad, is a matter of possible danger to life. Especially during a long war, when it is unknown when it will end.
This is despite the fact that sometimes at least some of these 4 options exist:
a] To go sleep in a public mamad/shelter.
b] To move temporarily to an apartment in an area where the likelihood of such danger is lower.
c] To build a mamad within a room in the existing apartment, without adding any new room.
d] To sell the apartment that has no mamad and buy an apartment with a mamad.
2] A sukkah for Sukkot is a Torah commandment.
Although, with the neighbors’ consent, one can make a kosher sukkah in the common courtyard.
And there is no obligation to build a new private balcony for this,
although it can certainly fall under the category of beautifying the mitzvah.
3] Many in this neighborhood/street have already built without a lawful building permit.
And the municipality did not issue them any fine,
and certainly did not demolish their new construction,
even though they skipped the stage of the neighbors’ right to express objection.
So why be particular with someone who does request a lawful building permit from the municipality?
For at the completion of the evacuation-reconstruction project, all 3 of these points will be nullified:
1] A mamad is planned for every apartment.
2] An uncovered balcony is planned for every apartment, to allow for a sukkah on Sukkot.
3] The municipality does enforce building permits on a street where all the buildings are new.
And when requesting permission from the neighbors not to object to the expansion of his apartment,
he presented the request for the neighbors’ approval of his apartment expansion
as though it was only until the evacuation-reconstruction that could reasonably be assumed to arrive at some point.
For he argued only one or more of these 3 reasons.
And he did not claim any additional reason from which it could be clear
that it would also be for calculating the area of the new apartment,
and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment,
and/or a monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value in the evacuation-reconstruction project.
Nevertheless, the contract with the evacuation-reconstruction developer
allows every building extension made with a building permit,
and at least in some cases also a building extension made without a building permit,
to be counted for the purpose of calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is reasonable to assume that this will be at the expense of the neighbors who had mercy and did not object to the building permits.
That is, they will receive smaller apartments, and/or a smaller common area, and/or a lower monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value, relative to what they could have received had they not agreed to the building permits.
For it is reasonable to assume that the developer/contractor will try not to reduce the financial profits he demands for himself in order to agree to the evacuation-reconstruction project.
The side supporting this might then argue that everyone could have built an extension.
And whoever did not build an extension to his apartment did not merit it, and that is his problem.
5 points against this argument:
1] Not everyone knew this law. And there is a line of reasoning that the legal principle that ignorance of the law does not exempt does not apply when 2 conditions exist:
a] The source of the law is not Orthodox Judaism.
b] The law is extremely illogical.
And it is clear that each of these 2 points is illogical:
a] Construction without a building permit from the municipality will be counted for the purpose of calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
b] Construction with a building permit from the municipality, but in the request for the neighbors’ consent to expand his apartment, there was a misrepresentation that their waiver was only until the evacuation-reconstruction,
and would not be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment, whereas in practice it will be counted.
And each of these 2 rewards will likely be at the expense of apartment owners in the same area/building who did keep the law,
meaning that they will receive smaller apartments, and/or a smaller common area, and/or a lower monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value, relative to what they could have received.
2] The municipality examines each building permit separately. And sometimes it depends on permission from the neighbors. Not all neighbors are righteous enough to be equally lenient.
3] Not everyone has readily available money to build an extension to the apartment. It is written in the Torah: "ודל לא תהדר בריבו" [from: Shemot 23:3] — “and you shall not favor a poor man in his dispute,” but until now, at least in some cases, the courts do not recognize this Torah prohibition.
4] It is easier for young residents to run to a mamad/public shelter.
5] It is easier for young residents to be in a sukkah in the common courtyard.
Therefore the question is whether, according to Orthodox Jewish Halacha:
1] Is the Knesset of Israel obligated to amend the law as follows:
a] For every apartment owner who has construction without any building permit from the municipality:
It is forbidden for him to receive that his illegal construction be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for it.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to delay evacuation-reconstruction on the basis of the claim that he is entitled to have his illegal construction counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for it.
And it is especially forbidden for any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for this to come at the expense of the new private residential area and/or the new common area and/or monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value
of his neighboring apartment owners who did keep the law.
b] For every apartment owner whose request for the neighbors’ consent to expand his apartment was based on the understanding that their waiver was only until the evacuation-reconstruction, and that it would not be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment:
It is forbidden for him to receive that his building extension be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for it.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to delay evacuation-reconstruction on the basis of the claim that he is entitled to have this construction of his counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for it.
And it is especially forbidden for any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for this to come at the expense of the new private residential area and/or the new common area and/or monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value
of his neighboring apartment owners, who were permitted to object to his expansion, whether they objected or not.
2] Until this law is amended:
a] Is every apartment owner who has construction without any building permit from the municipality obligated
to conduct himself as though the law had already been amended as written in the previous section?
b] Is every apartment owner whose request for the neighbors’ consent to expand his apartment was based on the understanding that their waiver was only until the evacuation-reconstruction, and that it would not be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment,
obligated to conduct himself as though the law had already been amended as written in the previous section?
c] For all other types of apartment owners, is it permitted to support an evacuation-reconstruction contract in which a monetary and/or monetarily valued benefit/compensation is guaranteed for such violations,
only if these 2 conditions exist:
1] The danger due to missile fire and/or earthquakes is sufficiently likely and sufficiently severe.
2] It helps expedite the construction of new residential buildings with mamad rooms.
Because danger is treated more stringently than prohibition.
Without a vow.
Thank you.
In the State of Israel, building rights are determined only according to the lawful building permit and the registration in the Tabu land registry.
The courts have ruled in many judgments
that it is forbidden to support a phenomenon in which an apartment owner with a building extension constructed without a building permit receives any kind of monetary reward and/or benefit of monetary value,
such as a larger apartment in an urban renewal project, by virtue of the illegal building extension,
and moreover at the expense of neighboring apartment owners who kept the law, or at the expense of the developer-contractor of the evacuation-reconstruction project.
From a property-law perspective, building a room on common property, without a building permit from the municipality and without the neighbors’ consent, constitutes an encroachment upon the common property.
In an evacuation-reconstruction project, this common property belongs to everyone,
and therefore the building rights calculated on the basis of its area belong to all the apartment owners in the area/building, as recorded in law and in the Tabu.
In addition,
the Real Estate Appraisers Council established Standard 21, which instructs appraisers how to calculate the consideration and the economic feasibility.
According to this standard, the area of the new apartment is calculated according to the area of the old apartment that received a building permit.
Any area in the old apartment that was built without a building permit is not counted for the purpose of calculating the area of the new apartment, nor is it counted for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
However,
in practice, the attorney for the apartment owners appoints an independent appraiser, funded by the developer, to measure each apartment and prepare a scoring table that determines what each apartment owner will receive.
Then the building deviations are divided into one of the following 4 categories:
1] The deviation is not counted. The apartment owner receives consideration like a neighbor who owns an identical apartment without a building deviation. This is the common approach regarding new building deviations and/or blatant construction encroachments.
2] Retroactive building permit. If, according to state law, the deviation can be legalized retroactively, such as enclosing a balcony for which there are unused building rights,
then the developer may agree to legalize it at his own expense or at the apartment owner’s expense before the new building permit. After legalization, the area becomes legal and is counted in calculating the consideration.
3] Statute of limitations. If the deviation is sufficiently old, and therefore there is some limitation period regarding enforcement under state law,
then the developer may agree to legalize it at his own expense or at the apartment owner’s expense before the new building permit. After legalization, the area becomes legal and is counted in calculating the consideration.
4] Preventing delay. In rare cases, in order to secure the apartment owner’s consent and prevent costly legal proceedings, it is agreed to give him partial compensation amounting to tens of percent of the value of a regular square meter.
[Response: an attorney specializing in evacuation-reconstruction. Date: 22/01/2026.]
And it appears that there are situations in which, due to a large number of building extensions without building permits in the same area/street,
the attorney for the apartment owners in the area/street obtains consent to an evacuation-reconstruction contract that does not distinguish between these 4 types of building deviations.
For example, a leading law firm working on behalf of apartment owners on a certain street obtained the consent of evacuation-reconstruction developers to the following 2 clauses:
"Clause 44: Approval of building deviations, namely areas built without a lawful building permit, except with regard to balcony areas, to which the provisions of Clause 45 below shall apply,
provided that the said building deviations actually exist as of: 30/12/2025. [This is a date that had passed at the time the contract was presented.]
Regarding building coefficients due to uses, the cut-off date shall be 30/12/2026. [This is a date that had not yet passed at the time the contract was presented.]
Clause 45: Approval of building deviations built as balcony areas, namely balcony areas built without a lawful building permit,
provided that the said building deviations actually exist as of 30/12/2025. [This is a date that had passed at the time the contract was presented.]
Regarding building coefficients due to uses, the cut-off date shall be 30/12/2026. [This is a date that had not yet passed at the time the contract was presented.]"
[From: the table of responses by the evacuation-reconstruction developers to a questionnaire submitted by the attorneys for the apartment owners.
The response table was published to the apartment owners on: 16/06/2026.]
And in this table there is no reference at all to dividing the building deviations into one of the 4 types listed above.
Therefore, it appears that there is a line of reasoning that it is permissible to count all types of building deviations for the purpose of calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for the purpose of calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
If an apartment owner has a building extension without any lawful building permit from the municipality,
there is a line of reasoning that it is illogical to count that area for the purpose of calculating the area and/or the additional area of the new apartment that each apartment owner will receive at the end of the evacuation-reconstruction project.
And even if he did receive a lawful building permit from the municipality,
there is a line of reasoning that it is illogical to count that area for the purpose of calculating the area and/or the additional area of the new apartment that each apartment owner will receive at the end of the evacuation-reconstruction project,
if, when he asked the neighbors not to object to the building permit, it was by means of one or more of these 3 arguments:
1] A new reinforced security room, a mamad, is a matter of possible danger to life. Especially during a long war, when it is unknown when it will end.
This is despite the fact that sometimes at least some of these 4 options exist:
a] To go sleep in a public mamad/shelter.
b] To move temporarily to an apartment in an area where the likelihood of such danger is lower.
c] To build a mamad within a room in the existing apartment, without adding any new room.
d] To sell the apartment that has no mamad and buy an apartment with a mamad.
2] A sukkah for Sukkot is a Torah commandment.
Although, with the neighbors’ consent, one can make a kosher sukkah in the common courtyard.
And there is no obligation to build a new private balcony for this,
although it can certainly fall under the category of beautifying the mitzvah.
3] Many in this neighborhood/street have already built without a lawful building permit.
And the municipality did not issue them any fine,
and certainly did not demolish their new construction,
even though they skipped the stage of the neighbors’ right to express objection.
So why be particular with someone who does request a lawful building permit from the municipality?
For at the completion of the evacuation-reconstruction project, all 3 of these points will be nullified:
1] A mamad is planned for every apartment.
2] An uncovered balcony is planned for every apartment, to allow for a sukkah on Sukkot.
3] The municipality does enforce building permits on a street where all the buildings are new.
And when requesting permission from the neighbors not to object to the expansion of his apartment,
he presented the request for the neighbors’ approval of his apartment expansion
as though it was only until the evacuation-reconstruction that could reasonably be assumed to arrive at some point.
For he argued only one or more of these 3 reasons.
And he did not claim any additional reason from which it could be clear
that it would also be for calculating the area of the new apartment,
and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment,
and/or a monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value in the evacuation-reconstruction project.
Nevertheless, the contract with the evacuation-reconstruction developer
allows every building extension made with a building permit,
and at least in some cases also a building extension made without a building permit,
to be counted for the purpose of calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is reasonable to assume that this will be at the expense of the neighbors who had mercy and did not object to the building permits.
That is, they will receive smaller apartments, and/or a smaller common area, and/or a lower monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value, relative to what they could have received had they not agreed to the building permits.
For it is reasonable to assume that the developer/contractor will try not to reduce the financial profits he demands for himself in order to agree to the evacuation-reconstruction project.
The side supporting this might then argue that everyone could have built an extension.
And whoever did not build an extension to his apartment did not merit it, and that is his problem.
5 points against this argument:
1] Not everyone knew this law. And there is a line of reasoning that the legal principle that ignorance of the law does not exempt does not apply when 2 conditions exist:
a] The source of the law is not Orthodox Judaism.
b] The law is extremely illogical.
And it is clear that each of these 2 points is illogical:
a] Construction without a building permit from the municipality will be counted for the purpose of calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
b] Construction with a building permit from the municipality, but in the request for the neighbors’ consent to expand his apartment, there was a misrepresentation that their waiver was only until the evacuation-reconstruction,
and would not be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment, whereas in practice it will be counted.
And each of these 2 rewards will likely be at the expense of apartment owners in the same area/building who did keep the law,
meaning that they will receive smaller apartments, and/or a smaller common area, and/or a lower monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value, relative to what they could have received.
2] The municipality examines each building permit separately. And sometimes it depends on permission from the neighbors. Not all neighbors are righteous enough to be equally lenient.
3] Not everyone has readily available money to build an extension to the apartment. It is written in the Torah: "ודל לא תהדר בריבו" [from: Shemot 23:3] — “and you shall not favor a poor man in his dispute,” but until now, at least in some cases, the courts do not recognize this Torah prohibition.
4] It is easier for young residents to run to a mamad/public shelter.
5] It is easier for young residents to be in a sukkah in the common courtyard.
Therefore the question is whether, according to Orthodox Jewish Halacha:
1] Is the Knesset of Israel obligated to amend the law as follows:
a] For every apartment owner who has construction without any building permit from the municipality:
It is forbidden for him to receive that his illegal construction be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for it.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to delay evacuation-reconstruction on the basis of the claim that he is entitled to have his illegal construction counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for it.
And it is especially forbidden for any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for this to come at the expense of the new private residential area and/or the new common area and/or monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value
of his neighboring apartment owners who did keep the law.
b] For every apartment owner whose request for the neighbors’ consent to expand his apartment was based on the understanding that their waiver was only until the evacuation-reconstruction, and that it would not be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment:
It is forbidden for him to receive that his building extension be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for it.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to delay evacuation-reconstruction on the basis of the claim that he is entitled to have this construction of his counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment.
And it is forbidden for him to be entitled to any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for it.
And it is especially forbidden for any monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value for this to come at the expense of the new private residential area and/or the new common area and/or monetary benefit/monetary compensation and/or benefit of monetary value
of his neighboring apartment owners, who were permitted to object to his expansion, whether they objected or not.
2] Until this law is amended:
a] Is every apartment owner who has construction without any building permit from the municipality obligated
to conduct himself as though the law had already been amended as written in the previous section?
b] Is every apartment owner whose request for the neighbors’ consent to expand his apartment was based on the understanding that their waiver was only until the evacuation-reconstruction, and that it would not be counted for calculating the area of the new apartment and/or for calculating the additional area of the new apartment,
obligated to conduct himself as though the law had already been amended as written in the previous section?
c] For all other types of apartment owners, is it permitted to support an evacuation-reconstruction contract in which a monetary and/or monetarily valued benefit/compensation is guaranteed for such violations,
only if these 2 conditions exist:
1] The danger due to missile fire and/or earthquakes is sufficiently likely and sufficiently severe.
2] It helps expedite the construction of new residential buildings with mamad rooms.
Because danger is treated more stringently than prohibition.
Without a vow.
Thank you.
Answer
Shalom and blessings.
This is an extremely complex question and cannot be decided within such a limited framework, but only in a session of an expanded and authorized beit din.
Much success.
Comments
Have an additional question on this topic or need clarification? Leave your comment below. (Please note that the comment will not be published but will be sent directly to the answering Rabbi for review and a private response)
