A company's Articles of Association contained a non-compete provision prohibiting shareholders from conducting business with the company's customers in the company's field of business.

As part of new Income Tax Ordinance Regulations published on November 1, 2017, it was determined that an "involuntary sale" of employee options granted pursuant to Article 102 of the Income Tax Ordinance ...

The Court noted that employers wishing to avoid payment in lieu of advance notice simply need to provide appropriate advance notification.

The fact that a company's activities are provided primarily through the internet does not grant immunity from litigation in the Israeli courts or from Israeli law.

The District Court of Tel Aviv recently held that the Israeli courts gained jurisdiction when a statement of claim was served in Israel on the vice-president of a foreign company.

Therefore, the defendants argued, the representations at issue were not binding on the parties.

On July 18, 2016 the Knesset approved a new law, the Supervision of Financial Services, 2016.

The District Court of Tel Aviv recently held that the cost of grants of options to purchase shares in a parent company pursuant to Section 102 of Israel's Income Tax Ordinance were to be considered "costs" ...

The District Court of Tel Aviv recently held that the Israeli courts gained jurisdiction when a statement of claim was served in Israel on the vice-president of a foreign company.

The Court pointed to case law holding that there is no requirement that payments be classified in the same manner by both payor and payee, or in this case, by both employer and employee.

The Court pointed to case law holding that there is no requirement that payments be classified in the same manner by both payor and payee, or in this case, by both employer and employee.

In this ruling, the District Court rejected a demand to apply an anti-dilution price protection mechanism.

This effectively provides the controlling shareholder with the same tax benefits available to other employees.

In the present case, the plaintiff employee was employed by an Israeli private company prior to the company's merger with a US public corporation.

Without exclusive ownership of intellectual property, a start-up would not have any value and would not be successful in raising capital.

The lower court had denied the applicants' request for a class action suit, and the present case was their appeal of that decision.

The Court held that as a matter of policy it is appropriate to recognize reliance on ISA Pre- Rulings.

The Israeli Supreme Court ("Supreme Court") held by a majority opinion that extraterritorial service of an application for the approval of an Israeli arbitration award based upon an arbitration clause...

The Tel Aviv District Court – Economic Division ("Court") considered what circumstances warrant court interference in decisions of a company's board of directors.

The Supreme Court reviewed a distinction developed over the years in the lower instance District Court decisions.