What is a Section 79A compromise ruling in an Israeli court and how does it differ from arbitration?

Sections 79A to 79C together form Israel’s in-court settlement toolkit. Section 79A permits a ruling by compromise, Section 79B allows the court to refer a case to arbitration with the parties’ consent, and Section 79C sends a case to mediation. Parties using 79A usually bracket the outcome in advance, agreeing a floor and a ceiling so the judge’s discretion is bounded, and that agreed range is recorded before the ruling is given. Because the judge already holds the pleadings and much of the evidence, the process is quick and needs no fresh appointment or file transfer. The result is registered and enforced through the Execution Office in the ordinary way, and it travels abroad under whatever rules the enforcing state applies to Israeli judgments.

For a foreign company already litigating in Israel, Section 79A can close a file in weeks rather than years, but three points deserve weighing before consenting. First, an award under the Arbitration Law moves internationally under the New York Convention, while a court judgment depends on the recognition rules of the country where you want to collect. Second, arbitration carries the arbitrator’s fee, whereas a 79A ruling adds nothing and commonly triggers a partial refund of the second court-fee instalment. Third, appeal rights against a compromise ruling are minimal, so the bracket agreed beforehand is the only real protection against an unexpected figure. Foreign parties comparing routes should also read the guide to mediation in Israeli courts.

From the full guide: Mediation in Israeli Courts

← Browse all Q&A