תוכן עניינים
By: Adv. Michael Lev
Water Leak in a Commercial Center: An Important Ruling on Shared Property Liability
Law offices regularly handle water damage cases in commercial centers and shared buildings. The Peace Court of Tel Aviv-Jaffa recently published a ruling (Case No. T.A. 15181-09-20) establishing important principles regarding the allocation of liability for water leak damages, particularly concerning the binding maintenance schedule.
How the Case Began
Our story begins in a commercial center where moisture damage developed as a result of a water leak from the upper floor. The shared building itself consisted of four separate wings, each with its own representation. When the matter was investigated, an expert appointed by the court clearly indicated: the leak source was located in the shared garden — a common area belonging to all.
Repair costs reached 115,830 shekels according to the expert’s assessment. The plaintiff did not wait and filed suit against the representation of three additional wings, arguing that they bore responsibility for paying for damage originating in a shared area.
What the Parties Argued in Court
The defendants raised a defense that seemed reasonable at first glance: the upper-floor representation’s decision from 2016 released them from all liability. The court rejected this defense immediately and categorically, ruling that the agreed maintenance schedule is the supreme legal instrument governing relations between apartment owners.
A second argument also carried significant weight. It asserted the superiority of the agreed maintenance schedule as the binding document, stating that later decisions or agreements cannot override it unilaterally.
The Legal Basis for Liability
The court chose to rest liability on two important legal principles:
Liability for escape: Section 38 of the Torts Ordinance [New Version], 5728-1947, establishes absolute liability for damages caused by a “thing that escaped” from the place where it was kept or held. The court confirmed again that water leak damages fall precisely within this definition.
Reversed burden of proof: In water leak matters, the legal presumption is that the owners of the premises from which water flows must prove they acted with reasonable caution. Here, the defendants failed to discharge this burden.
How Much Did the Plaintiff Ultimately Receive
The ruling determined that the plaintiff would receive 102,082 shekels from the defendants — three-quarters of the full repair cost. The court based this division on the agreed maintenance schedule and on principles of the Land Law, 5729-1969.
Why is this significant? Because it demonstrates that even when damage originates in a shared area, each wing or each individual property owner may bear proportional liability, in accordance with the distribution key recorded in the schedule.
What Owners and Planners Need to Know
If there is one key takeaway, it is this: in complex construction projects, the agreed maintenance schedule must be treated as almost surgical precision. We recommend time and again clarifying that the distribution key for expenses and liability be transparent and unambiguous, as this protects against lengthy and painful disputes in the future.
A second point: water leakage does not depend on proof of negligence or anything similar. This concerns absolute liability — it applies even when damage was not caused through any fault at all.
Questions We Frequently Hear
Can a decision of the building’s representation replace the agreed maintenance schedule?
No, and this ruling emphasizes this clearly. The agreed maintenance schedule is the binding and determining document, and ordinary decisions of representations cannot erase or alter it. Changing a schedule requires a formal procedure in accordance with the Land Law.
What happens when it is not clear exactly where the leak came from?
When there is doubt about the source of the leak, the court transfers the burden of proof to the defendants. Anyone who could be considered responsible must prove that they did not cause the damage.
How is liability precisely divided among different wings?
The division is based on the distribution key stated in the agreed maintenance schedule. If the schedule itself is unclear, it is necessary to rely on principles of the Land Law and the relative distribution of rights in shared areas.
If you have questions about water damages or shared property law, contact us for a free consultation.
The above content does not constitute legal advice. For guidance tailored to your situation, please contact the office. Call: 072-2428822 or visit: https://lt-law.co.il/delivery-delay/
