A legal dispute spanning over a decade has concluded in the Jerusalem Magistrates' Court, ordering Global Retail K. I. , the Carrefour franchisee in Israel, to pay 100,000 NIS in non-pecuniary damages, alongside 17,000 NIS in legal expenses. The plaintiff, an 86-year-old Jerusalem resident living above a branch of the chain, argued that delivery trucks arriving late at night to unload goods created a persistent nuisance that damaged his quality of life. According to N12, citing a report by Bizportal, the claim centered on repeated violations of settlement agreements and business license conditions intended to regulate delivery hours at the branch, located on the ground floor of the building where the plaintiff has lived since 1973.
The plaintiff presented extensive documentation of these violations, alleging that despite temporary injunctions issued in the past, the chain continued to operate in defiance of the required conditions. During legal proceedings, sharp criticism was leveled at the company's conduct. The court noted in previous decisions that the company appeared determined to address matters with its suppliers only when financial interests were at stake, while ignoring breaches when no such pressure existed.
While the branch and chain managers claimed to have made efforts to prevent the nuisance, investigations revealed that enforcement measures were neither effective nor consistent. In her ruling, Judge Orna Sandler-Eitan determined that the plaintiff suffered a tangible and substantial interference, justifying compensation under the private nuisance tort of the Civil Wrongs Ordinance. Although the court accepted the company's argument that a previous settlement agreement was nullified upon the receipt of a new business license, it found that the tortious damages for the nuisance exceeded amounts that would have been awarded under the old agreement.
The judge also criticized the Jerusalem Municipality, noting that the authority should enforce business license conditions more strictly to spare residents the need to repeatedly resort to litigation. The ruling emphasizes that the profits of retail chains do not justify infringing upon the quality of life and peace of building residents. This judgment serves as a reminder that the lack of an economic incentive for companies to rectify failures does not exempt them from their obligation to comply with the law and established arrangements.